Hosting the live cd

Rahul Sundaram metherid at
Thu Oct 9 19:24:59 CEST 2008

KH KH wrote:
> What I don't like much with Omega, hosted here is that:RPMFusion is 
> defined as an additional repository for Fedora.This means RPMFusion is 
> not another distribution based on Fedora.
> As a RPMFusion contributor. I still want to think I'm contributing to
> Fedora via an additional repository, not a derived distro.
If you are not interested in Omega, you can continue to contribute to just RPMFusion packaging. Omega would just be a sub project that you are not involved in, which is just fine. A rpmfusion spin was discussed in this list before and my efforts are directly in response to that. Although, if the consensus now is that you don't want a live cd at all, I can host it elsewhere. I would like to hear other's opinions on this. 

> Knowing that, the only official iso from RPMFusion would be (IMO) an
> additional set of packages composed as a local repository aimed for
> post installation.
> (which remains untested/unworked until then).
> That would be the solution I would see to get pushed.
These two different solutions cannot be done in parallel. There are 
different use cases for both.
> Why I see Omega as uneeded is that:
> When using an official Fedora LiveCD iso, you can still transfert it
> on a USB disk/key and activate persistence.
> That way you can add some packages from rpmfusion suitable for codec etc.
> But everything else fall under a customization process where there are
> million of possibilities.
There are many reasons where a distributable live cd  (especially 
combined with regular updated revisions) could be more convenient.  That 
is validated by the amount of downloads and positive feedback I have 
been getting overall. Not everybody has the bandwidth, expertise or 
interest to do additional customizations. Even if they do, this can 
still be a better starting point for them.

> At this time Omega doesn't sort out why some packages are choosen and
> not others.
 From the discussions in this list,  the consensus was that only 
packages from the free repository should be included.  I posted a 
kickstart file with the typical set of packages that a end user would 
install and then proceeded to create a image based on that. If there is 
a different set of packages that needs to be installed, that is very 
open for discussions. I have been asking for feedback often.
> In my mind, I see Omega as a demonstration purpose and not a everyday
> life distro. that's why I see the distribution of the resulting ISO as
> an optional thing (but indeed, sometime needed, mostly for beginner).
> So, maybe the iso can be made available via bittorrent eventually.
Without the resulting ISO being widely distributed and tested, we 
wouldn't know whether it worked or not.  As I started using the tools to 
generate the Live CD, I have run into several issues which are being 
resolved iteratively. The result is useful for other derivative 
distributions that are going to consume bits from Fedora as well as 

> And I would like to see a page somewhere that describe the Omega
> LiveCD (goals, and howto re-create).
> Something like or else ...


More information about the rpmfusion-developers mailing list