3 Dec
2011
3 Dec
'11
1:20 p.m.
On 12/03/2011 07:17 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Am 03.12.2011 02:08, schrieb Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi: >>> I don't see the point in adding FTP - HTTP is superior in any way. Other >>> than that: Our .sfs images are rather tiny, you will barely notice the >>> difference, so no objections from me. >>> >> OK, I will only add darkhttp. If HTTP works then also FTP will work from >> the point of view of the hook. > Indeed. My concerns with FTP again: > 1) gPXE/iPXE do not support FTP as it seems (only HTTP). Yes. Support it. but is normally not built-in, like HTTPS. Note: gPXE is not activelly maintained. I still use gpxe because of the nice online generator. iPXE is the active a fork. Indeed qemu switched to iPXE in this year. > 2) In general, FTP is more problematic from the network point-of-view, > as it needs to open two connections. > 3) HTTP is more stable than FTP from my experience. I agree. I will remove the word FTP from the README and the wiki. Just let the user to discover that: "hey it use curl!, so I can use FTP HTTPS and others....." What do you think about rename hook archiso_pxe_curl -> archiso_pxe_http and also bootparm archiso_curl_url= -> archiso_http_srv= ? > >> geek comment: maybe it just fit in the multiple of current ISO padding >> size :P > I prefer to remaster the ISO onto USB (copy /arch, install syslinux) or > netboot it over the internet. My concern therefore is the size of the > .sfs files, not the actual .iso. > Sure, my comment was a joke ;) -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi \cos^2\alpha + \sin^2\alpha = 1