How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Hi
I would like to make a DVD version of knoppix (3.6 would be great)
but I would like to use the 4.5 Gb available space to put an uncompressed KNOPPIX file instead of adding more apps
like this there would be no need for a huge ram drive and it will be much faster I guess
Is there an easy way to do this?
It could be the same thing than the hdd-installed version of knoppix since I will use it on only one computer, but it has to work read only (since it's on a DVD) I will do a fat32 partition for storiing my data and configs.
Re: How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorxd
and it will be much faster I guess
My guess is that it will not be faster, and in fact will be slower. You will effectively increase the amount of I/O needed to be done from the disc for any application. I/O is a bottleneck. I think you'll find that it's faster to read the (fewer) compressed sectors and then expand them with a little CPU power than to have the CPU waiting around idle while all of the data comes in from the uncompressed disc.
I saw a pratical application of this over twenty five years ago, back when there were people who still understood that optimizing space and speed is important. A programmer decided to use a form of dynamic huffman encoding to encode text coming from a database for a game, but was a little concerned that the added overhead to decode the huffman encoded text would slow the game. It turned out it sped it up because less disk I/O was used. And this was with a hard drive on a "mainframe" (even then faster than a DVD drive now) and much much less CPU power than you have sitting on your desktop. So unless the klopp decoding code is really really bad, uncompressing the klopp isn't going to be a net gain.
Re: How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorxd
I would like to make a DVD version of knoppix (3.6 would be great)
I've done this. To the nay sayers, it works fine.
Here's what I did:
1) Mount the boot image.
2) Edit the linuxrc
- change cloop to loop
- remove knoppix-ized ash and replace with statically linked busybox with "mount" with loop mounting capability.
3) Make a bunch of symlinks under /static for the busybox components.
4) Unmount the boot image.
5) Uncompress the root ISO image KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX
6) Create a new ISO image - this is the trickiest part IMHO.
I'll put together a web page with more details if there is interest.
Re: How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISoar
I've done this. To the nay sayers, it works fine.
You didn't say if it's faster or (as suspected) slower. Give us real numbers please, including:
How long it takes to boot your Knopix CD.
How long it takes to boot your Knoppix DVD (on the same drive).
You CPU type and speed, memory, optical drive make and model.
What speed each the CD and DVD were burnt at (I ask this because a Knoppix CD burnt fast will often take much longer to boot than one burnt slow, due to a high number of retries required during boot).
In addition to booting speeds, you might benchmark the starting of some applications from the optical media, such as GIMP, and tell us how long each takes from first click until ready to run.
Re: How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Kuhman
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISoar
I've done this. To the nay sayers, it works fine.
You didn't say if it's faster or (as suspected) slower. Give us real numbers please, including:
I've not run any benchmarks against the official CD-ROM. My intent was not performance, but rather ease of customization (much easier to add stuff to the root if it is an uncompressed ISO on a DVD). I was not claiming it to be faster, just possible.
FWIW, I've started a web page HOWTO. It's incomplete (needs more info on busybox), but is mostly there. Not really that difficult to do.
Re: How to make a knoppix DVD UNCOMPRESSED
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Kuhman
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISoar
I've done this. To the nay sayers, it works fine.
You didn't say if it's faster or (as suspected) slower. Give us real numbers please, including:
How long it takes to boot your Knopix CD.
How long it takes to boot your Knoppix DVD (on the same drive).
You CPU type and speed, memory, optical drive make and model.
What speed each the CD and DVD were burnt at (I ask this because a Knoppix CD burnt fast will often take much longer to boot than one burnt slow, due to a high number of retries required during boot).
In addition to booting speeds, you might benchmark the starting of some applications from the optical media, such as GIMP, and tell us how long each takes from first click until ready to run.
Okay, I went and burned the official CD-ROM ISO on the same DVD+RW disc. The speed results are not surprising: twice as fast booting when compressed. I've not tried your other tests; I'll leave that as an exercise fo the reader :)
My goal wasn't speed though.
Why doesn't anyone make a DVD version using UDF 2.01?
Why are all Knoppix distros ISO9660? Isn't UDF better? There is no 2GB file size limit in UDF 2.01 (or ealier versions for that matter). If most systems can't boot off of UDF, then you can make a hybrid like DVD video discs, but unlike a DVD video disc, instead of the ISO and the UDF file systems containing references to the same files, the ISO would only reference the files necesary for booting and the rest of the files plus all the files referenced in the ISO system would be referenced in the UDF file system.
Re: Why doesn't anyone make a DVD version using UDF 2.01?
Quote:
Originally Posted by losmurfs
Why are all Knoppix distros ISO9660? Isn't UDF better? There is no 2GB file size limit in UDF 2.01 (or ealier versions for that matter). If most systems can't boot off of UDF, then you can make a hybrid like DVD video discs, but unlike a DVD video disc, instead of the ISO and the UDF file systems containing references to the same files, the ISO would only reference the files necesary for booting and the rest of the files plus all the files referenced in the ISO system would be referenced in the UDF file system.
UDF is really specifically for DVDs, and it has a <1 GB limit. From UDF v2.00 Draft page 7:
"Extent Length: Maximum Extent Length shall be 2^30 - Logical Block Size."
and from page 104:
"The data of each file shall be recorded as a single extent. Each File Entry shall be recorded using the ICB Strategy Type 4."
UDF is a specific implementation of ISO/IEC 13346 (I think ECMA 167 may be equivalent) by the OSTA. Basically, the standard doesn't have enough details for implementation, so one must fill in the blanks according to the spec, which is what the OSTA did to in their own way to get UDF.
I gave up on UDF when I ran head first into CSS years back when I started the (now defunct?) linux-udf project. Thankfully that whole mess has been resolved by others (in the courts). So feel free to correct me if my info is dated.
Re: Why doesn't anyone make a DVD version using UDF 2.01?
Quote:
Originally Posted by losmurfs
Why are all Knoppix distros ISO9660? Isn't UDF better? There is no 2GB file size limit in UDF 2.01 (or ealier versions for that matter). If most systems can't boot off of UDF, then you can make a hybrid like DVD video discs, but unlike a DVD video disc, instead of the ISO and the UDF file systems containing references to the same files, the ISO would only reference the files necesary for booting and the rest of the files plus all the files referenced in the ISO system would be referenced in the UDF file system.
UDF is really specifically for DVDs, and it has a <1 GB limit. From UDF v2.00 Draft page 7:
"Extent Length: Maximum Extent Length shall be 2^30 - Logical Block Size."
and from page 104:
"The data of each file shall be recorded as a single extent. Each File Entry shall be recorded using the ICB Strategy Type 4."
UDF is a specific implementation of ISO/IEC 13346 (I think ECMA 167 may be equivalent) by the OSTA. Basically, the standard doesn't have enough details for implementation, so one must fill in the blanks appropriately, which is what the OSTA did in their own way to get UDF.
I gave up on UDF when I ran head first into CSS years back when I started the (now defunct?) linux-udf project. Thankfully that whole mess has been resolved by others (in the courts). So feel free to correct me if my info is dated.