[arch-releng] [RFC] one more step forward to become archiso as self-pxe-server...

[Thomas Bächler]

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).
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.

> 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.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-releng/attachments/20111203/9bbe0e5c/attachment.asc>