Victor Chew wrote:
Quote:
I wonder whether there should be some comment about searching for auxiliary tools as alternative installation method, as we have been asked (and answered) recently here in the forum regarding the installation of UBCDLive under Linux. See "Alternate ways of writing UBCDLive V0.2.2b ISO to USB?" as example (but beware of the specific instructions in that topic, as they are not exactly valid "as-is" for UBCD).
I will include multibootusb as a possible alternative in the instructions as mentioned in that thread. (I will also be testing multibootusb on UBCDLive later when I have time. I think it will probably work since it is Debian-based.)
In the topic I already linked to, your instructions were already for UBCDLive. My point is the other way around: the instructions you posted are not going to work "as-is" for UBCD5.3.5.iso; they rather need some minimal modification. The reason is that UBCDLive uses a Debian structure for ISOLINUX without improvements, while UBCD uses a structure better suited (with version 4.07 of Syslinux) for multiboot and customizations. In UBCD (not UBCDLive) this includes the usage of absolute paths for the c32 modules in the cfg files, which is the "correct" way to do it, at least for version 4.07 of Syslinux.
If you add specific instructions for auxiliary tools (e.g. multibootusb), I would suggest providing the context (e.g. "performed under Debian Wheezy with version N.M of X tool"). Other context environments (e.g. other distro, other versions...) might have different results (because of different paths in the distro, or the behavior of the auxiliary tool in other environments...).
A different approach could be to add to the "readme" link to a (pinned) topic here in the forum, with instructions and comments. Such topic would be "closed" for comments. You would only update it when needed (by editions with "strike-through" tags, or by additional posts in the same pinned topic), and additional comments / suggestions about it should be posted in other topics, maintaining a clean pinned topic with no "endless discussions and multiple opinions" that would only confuse final users / readers searching for a clear tutorial.
Quote:
Quote:
Finally, the "Additional resources" link is outdated and has some flaws.
I agree that the link provided may be slightly outdated, but I don't see any outright flaw.
Anyways, I will incorporate your suggestions in the instructions for the next release.
The article has some flaws, but I really don't want to discuss it here. The other point is much more important: the "readme" has been updated in such a way that the reason for the article to exist in the first place is no longer relevant, and there is no other positive contribution in the article. Moreover, the article is not "generic enough", so Linux users of many distros with newer versions of Syslinux should not follow those instructions. In other words, currently there is no positive contribution in that article, and there are potential negative effects when following its instructions.
Which brings me to one of the most repeated mistakes made by users: the version of the bootloader shall match the exact same version of the c32 modules (and/or, equivalently, state it the other way around too). Another way to express it: there shall be an exact match between the version of the bootloader and the version of the c32 modules. This comment (or similar) should be added to the "readme". Some Linux users will mix the methods, or will miss the usage of the specific installers included in UBCD.
For example (among several other situations), when using the syslinux installer installed in the distro (instead of the one already included in UBCD), the c32 files in UBCD should be replaced with the ones installed in the distro. When correctly following the instructions (i.e. using the installer already included in UBCD), then the c32 modules already used in UBCD should be fine.
Some users take their "working" USB drive and they simply copy over the files from UBCD. This can easily end with a mismatch version error between the version of the bootloader they already have and the c32 modules included in UBCD. This situation is also frequently found when using auxiliary tools (Unetbootin and similar).
These situations are more common than you might think; suffice to read forum posts in any distro's forum, or in mailing lists, or irc, or...
I hope these comments would help to improve the "readme", or at least to some users attempting to install UBCD to a (USB) drive.