[arch-general] Question regarding the ArchLinux iso core image

[Allan McRae]

On 18/05/10 21:21, Matthew Monaco wrote:
> On 05/18/2010 03:34 AM, Jan de Groot wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 03:17 -0400, Keith Hinton wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>> I've recently seen threads on this list pertaining to interesting
>>> issues with the Arch Linux core isos.
>>> I haven't had that problem in my primary tests of those Isos in
>>> particular.
>>> Is there any reason why a successful installation may occur in one
>>> environment over another? Or is this a common Linux problem.
>>> Thanks for answering my question.
>>> I hope that the rest of you folks have successful Core installations,
>>> however a net-install is the only real way to isntall Arch Linux.
>>> I do not see the point of the core installer media, personally. Why
>>> would one wish to use that? A snapshot will become outdated in a
>>> flash, and all of you archers know this. As soon as a newer package
>>> version is available the entire snapshot is outdated instantly. Or
>>> will be, given a few weeks/months/years/whatever.
>>> I therefore have always installed from what I believe to be the
>>> Arch-Way, wich is installing via the Internet alone to have an
>>> updated system.
>>> Does anyone agree/disagree with my idea on the proper way to install
>>> Arch? :D
>>> Regards, --Keith
>>
>> My prefered way of installing any linux distribution is using bootstrap
>> tools. For Debian this is debootstrap, for Archlinux this is pacman -r.
>> The point of having an installer with packages on the ISO is that you
>> don't always have the possibility to do a network installation.
>>
>>
>
> What about the install scripts then? pacman -r (and -b) don't
> necessarily assure that the install scripts behave properly.
>

Really...   they should do.