ISO9660 file format, not the other ISOs.
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2024
23 points (92.6% liked)
Excellent Reads
1541 readers
18 users here now
Are you tired of clickbait and the current state of journalism? This community is meant to remind you that excellent journalism still happens. While not sticking to a specific topic, the focus will be on high-quality articles and discussion around their topics.
Politics is allowed, but should not be the main focus of the community.
Submissions should be articles of medium length or longer. As in, it should take you 5 minutes or more to read it. Article series’ would also qualify.
Please either submit an archive link, or include it in your summary.
Rules:
- Common Sense. Civility, etc.
- Server rules.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Thank fuck not ISO8601. Wish ISO 27001 would tho, such a pain to comply.
27001/2 are required. And they're only hard to adopt when the Delta is just so much. If you're doing ITIL to your best extent then it should be easier: people are used to accepting incoming wisdom and there are opportunities to implement in an orderly fashion.
So, "moving fast and breaking stuff" is further into the "yeehaw kids" realm.
Oop, fixed
I have a few CD-ROMs labeled "High Sierra" because the ISO 9660 format was always a loose approximation of what people were already doing. It got kludged even harder as CD-R and CD-RW took off. Turning that into something a USB drive can boot was a magic trick that lasted far longer than it probably should've.
Perhaps this is a silly question. Why not release on both formats?
https://easyos.org/about/why-the-iso-format-has-to-die.html has parts about why not release an ISO as well. The most pertinent part seems to be at the bottom.
Can you use a .img file on a DVD? I store all the ISOs I have on optical media. Other than that, .img sounds like a really good format. I would have to learn something new to use it though.
Yes. ImgBurn, which is what I used to use with CDs, supports it.