by homeworld.cygnus.com with SMTP; 13 Oct 1998 03:54:10 -0000
          via smtpd (for homeworld.cygnus.com [205.180.83.70]) with SMTP; 13 Oct 1998 03:54:09 UT
	by mail.anim.dreamworks.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA19344;
	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
	by cynic.anim.dreamworks.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA26884;
	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Brownlee <abs@anim.dreamworks.com>
To: Markus Illenseer <markus@core.de>
cc: netbsd-advocacy@NetBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Export NetBSD CDs
In-Reply-To: <199810112139.XAA18932@beaver.core.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.05.9810121842450.17004-100000@cynic.anim.dreamworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998, Markus Illenseer wrote:

> > 	The OpenBSD CDroms are bootable on "i386, sparc, alpha, powerpc,
> > 	and arc". I don't know if they do this by making each CD bootable
> > 	on a subset of machines, but it would be nce if we could manage to
> > 	make the NetBDS CDRom bootable on more platforms if possible.
> 
>  I know how they do for i386 and sparc. I fail to know about alpha and
> powerpc _all_ on the _same_ CD. There is only one double header, as far
> as I know, not a set for each platform. The later would be unaffordable.
> 
	Probably each of the two CDs bootable on two platforms.

	The gateway CD is already bootable on i836 - if another platform
	could be added to that it would be really helpful... :)
	
> > 	I wonder if we could add the source in a ustar format file (I
> > 	noticed	the alpha bootloader has a ustarfs filesystem reader).
> 
>  You mean tar'ed but not compressed? 
> (BTW, how would a _source_ help to boot?)
> 
	Sorry - I was answering a different part of the email- I should
	have included that section :) - That was a suggestion as to how
	to make the source directly mountable on the CD-Rom.

>  Yes, I have thought about that already. I.e. I wont distribute
> Emacs :-) Emacs is too big, and there are even two Emacsen, both of
> which claim to be different - just not in space.
> 
	I picked pice as probably one of the simplest editors around
	(its also part of pine, which is one of the best text mailers),
	but maybe one of the micro-emacs clones would also make sense.
	I just think we should have _something_ other than vi for new
	users (I prefer vi, but its lame to inflict vi or ed on people
	who are just starting unix)

>  Well, you see the problem: What is a "popular" package? Is it better
> to give several smaller packages a better chance against one large hog?
> 
	I'd pick packages that are of imediate use to inexperienced users
	first (simple editor, and maybe tcsh , bang top of that list),
	followed by whatever people think are the most commonly useful.

>  pkgsrc is 1MB packed, about 4MB unpacked; Would be a good idea to
> unpack the sources for a possible UNION-Mount. Distributing distfiles
> would solve the dilemma to decide which binary package should be put

	Agreed on both counts.

> on the CD. But then again, the slower platforms (and the lazy guys)
> would be happy to get binary distributions.
> 
	Would be nice - if only we had the space...

		David/absolute

                  -=-  and team B will be... Kenny.  -=-