Stuff that has not yet gone into the official build.
Post a reply
golinux

- golinux
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:23 am

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Tue Jan 07, 2014 8:09 pm

> fsmithred wrote:A usb thumb drive IS an external usb drive. It's just smaller and solid state instead of spinning disks.

That's something I actually understand. I'd just never seen a discussion about using this script to install on a spinning disk so didn't know it was possible or recommended. So asking again . . .why use this script instead of a regular full-blown installation? I'd appreciate knowing the pros and cons. I'm thinking if I unplug my internal drives, I'd get a clean full-system install on the disk-driven usb that would boot without interfering with internal grub (or windoze MBR) if usb is the first boot device.

> fsmithred wrote:On a live-cd or usb, the operating system's filesystem is stored inside a file named filesystem.squashfs. When you run the live system, it gets unpacked from that file. You can't change what's inside that file - the system is read-only. If you set up full persistence, you can edit system files or install software, but none of those changes get applied to what's in filesystem.squashfs. Instead, the edited or added files are stored on the persistent partition (or loopback file), and the operating system knows to use those files instead of the originals from the CD image. If you install a lot of extra software, you could fill up your persistent volume.
> So there may be some advantage to using a live system. If you get rooted, or if you screw up your configurations, you can always boot into the original system that came from the live-cd, and you could even wipe the persistent files and start over (from the point of having a read-only system on the media.) You need to use fat32 for the first partition if you're running a live system and using syslinux boot loader. Other partitions don't have to be ext2, but we recommend that for thumb drives because there will be more space and fewer writes to the drive with a non-journaled file system. In theory, it should last longer that way. (I've never heard of anyone counting how many times they could write to a stick before killing it, but I suspect it's fewer times than the manufacturer claims.)

Excellent info that clears some of the fog. Thanks.

> fsmithred wrote:A four year old machine should have a way to select the boot device. It might be F8 (Dell), F12 (I forget - maybe HP) or Esc (my Foxcon motherboard) or some other key. Failing that, you could probably go into the bios and mess with the boot devices and boot order, but that can sometimes get ugly with multiple drives. I've got four internal drives, and I've screwed up the order several times and couldn't boot correctly until I straightened it out.

This machine is a custom build with a Gigabyte MB. He'll have to RTFM!

> fsmithred wrote:And about "the three options". There are more options. You can read about them in the debian-live manual (or maybe it's called the live-build manual) and maybe in man live-boot. Do that when you're ready to experience information overload.

Indeed, probably TMI for the moment but good to know. Thanks for your patience. I'll 'get it' eventually.
golinux

- golinux
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:23 am

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:19 pm

Just a thought . . . you might want to consider adding a "How it works" section to the README. I found your explanation very helpful. It would help to demystify the process for those who are unfamiliar with this process.
dzz

- dzz
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:53 am
- Location: Devon, England

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:50 pm

Got linuxmint-16-cinnamon to boot. Not tried in a multiboot setup however.
There is a hidden directory ".disk" in the iso, looks like that needs to be there.
At the same time I tried extlinux for this one (but I don't see why syslinux should not work also)
Method:
You need root, unlike with FAT. Format device ext2. Mount it and copy *all* iso contents over. Leave it mounted. Then:

Code:
  `mkdir /usb_mountpoint/extlinux
  extlinux -i /usb_mountpoint/extlinux
  cp -a /usb_mountpoint/isolinux/* /usb_mountpoint/extlinux/
  cp -a /usb_mountpoint/extlinux/isolinux.cfg /usb_mountpoint/extlinux/extlinux.conf`

No other changes. A good exercise and a reminder of why I actually use only Debian.
EDIT
Moved everything except ".disk" and extlinux to directory /mint .. edited the menu pointing there to vmlinuz and initrd.lz .. used "live-media-path=/mint/casper/" It boots as long as ".disk" is in the device root. Therefore it can be configured for multiboot (unless, presumably, there is another conflicting ".disk"). As far as I know casper and live-boot are similar but I don't understand what ".disk" is for. Never mind, I won't be actually using this stuff.
nadir

- nadir
- Posts: 1160
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 4:18 am
- Location: here

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:35 am

> golinux wrote: So asking again . . .why use this script instead of a regular full-blown installation? I'd appreciate knowing the pros and cons. I'm thinking if I unplug my internal drives, I'd get a clean full-system install on the disk-driven usb that would boot without interfering with internal grub (or windoze MBR) if usb is the first boot device.

You kinda said it yourself, as far i am related. If you take a Debian installation medium (CD or DVD) and point it to a stick, you might run into problems using it on each and every PC out there ( while, what you say, should work pretty well, i think. But you could also just point the debian-installer to the stick instead of mbr of /dev/sda and choose the stick as boot medium via hotkeys).
But then: When i used USB sticks for such fooling is ages ago. I barely remember anything (Mainly what i just wrote and that not all of my PC's boot from USB at all, but that starts to change, of course). Never did anything with persistence or such (but used default installation instead).
So, i think, the script will make it really "portable", plug-and-play.
Just a bit of chat, an idea, nothing serious (my humble opinion on the matter).
In general i never really understood why people use sticks with such passion (but i am rather non-mobile, and if i go mobile, twice a year, i just use my laptop). iow: i am lazy like an old dog.
fsmithred

- fsmithred
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:13 pm

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:16 am

dzz, if you haven't wiped it from the stick, could you (or did you) try it with .disk in /mint? That would avoid conflicts with other .disk files. Oops. It's a directory, not a file. I looked in it, but I don't understand it, either.
dzz

- dzz
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:53 am
- Location: Devon, England

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 3:24 pm

already tried.. "can't find a medium containing the live image" then busybox
fsmithred

- fsmithred
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:13 pm

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 3:37 pm

Oh, I just had an idea. It would be good to be able to view the menu that came with the iso when you're editing the menu you're going to use. If both open in a text editor, it might be confusing, but if one opened in a text editor, and the other opened in a yad/zenity text-info box, you could copy/paste from the info box to the editor. Does that sound reasonable or crazy?
@golinux:
What nadir said. I use the live-usb for troubleshooting and for any computing I do on someone else's computer. The live image is significantly smaller than a regular install, but that may not be so important, now that 32 and 64GB thumb drives are available.
golinux

- golinux
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:23 am

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 4:16 pm

> fsmithred wrote:@golinux:
> What nadir said. I use the live-usb for troubleshooting and for any computing I do on someone else's computer. The live image is significantly smaller than a regular install, but that may not be so important, now that 32 and 64GB thumb drives are available.

I just want to find a way to give a friend Linux with persistent capabilities to play on without messing with his Windows (xp and 7) MBR in any way. Trying to set up a dual - actually triple - boot with winders on someone else's machine terrifies me. I'm hoping this can be an easy and 'safe' solution. I'll figure it out eventually.
fsmithred

- fsmithred
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:13 pm

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Thu Jan 09, 2014 8:10 pm

Yesterday I guided someone through the installation process over the phone. On Asus EEE that has winXP. Chose expert install but didn't select any options. Deleted the second partition (which was empty) and made a new one. Put grub in mbr. It worked. He now has dual-boot. It's even easier if you're there to see it happen.
If it's a new machine with uefi, I can't help. Never tried that and only read a little about it, and most of that was outdated material.
dzz

- dzz
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:53 am
- Location: Devon, England

## Re: Alternative usb installation method, part 2

Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:03 pm

Some have said this thread is "over their heads". I really like the technical discussions here, it's after all the "experimental" section. However it's not limited to that and discussion of real use of this stuff is valuable too. A live image can be much more than just an installation medium on a stick which emulates a cdrom . Please do post non-technical opinions, use cases, problems, successes, wishlists and whatever.
A good example:

> I just want to find a way to give a friend Linux with persistent capabilities to play on without messing with his Windows (xp and 7) MBR in any way. Trying to set up a dual - actually triple - boot with winders on someone else's machine terrifies me. I'm hoping this can be an easy and 'safe' solution.

A very safe option which will give a good introduction to Linux till ready to do a "real" install. A Refracta live image does not even automount the fixed disk (some distros might). Mine boots within 30 seconds on a core 2 and runs fast..
RE uefi: will have to sort that at some stage.. it also affects disks over 2TB on older machines. Main thing is, a boot partition is needed and it doesn't use "msdos" style mbr and partition table.. Grub-pc can handle it. Not that I know much about it, not having that sort of hardware here.

> It would be good to be able to view the menu that came with the iso when you're editing the menu you're going to use. If both open in a text editor, it might be confusing, but if one opened in a text editor, and the other opened in a yad/zenity text-info box, you could copy/paste from the info box to the editor. Does that sound reasonable or crazy?

Translation: "reasonable or essential?" (but done in a non-confusing way) Other distros aside, normal debian-live images might have different boot options, like live-config, which Refracta uses only selectively.
Post a reply
Jump to:

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.

phpBB Mobile / SEO by Artodia.