Same installation problem over and over again.

[Nils Kassube]

elmo wrote:
> It seems that we're seeing the same thing over and over....someone has
> downloaded the ISO and then burned (copied) it to a disk and the disk
> doesn't work.
>
> What some instructions imply is that the ISO is the IMAGE and all you
> have to do is copy the ISO to a disk and you'll have an IMAGE disk when
> in fact what you have is a copy of a compressed version of the IMAGE in
> a single file

Well, actually it isn't a compressed version of an image but an 
uncompressed version of an image. Maybe the naming convention is 
debatable, but e.g. k3b has the option to "burn an ISO image" (at least 
that's how I would translate the German command). The problem seems to be 
that some not so intelligent Windows programs can look inside the image 
and see the files which makes people think they could just copy the files 
to a CD. However if that program would be a bit more intelligent it would 
find out that is is in fact an ISO image and offer the option to burn it 
appropriately.

> It was only when I discovered by experimentation that the ISO is a
> single file and by running it thru an extraction, you'd see several
> files.  I then investigated my Nero and discovered a burner program
> that is specific for creating IMAGE disks. What it does is
> simultaneously extract and burn so the result is an IMAGE CD that has
> several files. 

No, nothing is extracted if you burn an iso image. The image file has the 
exact layout of the CD and nothing may be changed.

> Which leads to a question.....if you first perform an 
> extraction on the ISO and then copy the resulting files to a disk,
> would that be an IMAGE disk?

No. If you extract the files, e.g. the boot loader is missing, i.e. it 
doesn't work.

> Instructions for creating an IMAGE CD should include a brief
> explanation of the difference between an ISO and IMAGE and that a
> simple copy is not the way to go.

Then what would you call an "image"? IMHO, if you copy the files to a CD 
it can't be called an image because the location of the files is not 
necessarily at the appropriate position of the resulting disk. It isn't 
an image it only has a similar contents.


Nils