differeneces between USB stick image and LiveDVD image?

Hi,

I built both the USB stick/hard disk image and the LiveCD/DVD image. The size of the USB stick image is about 1.1 GB while the size of the LiveCD/DVD is about 0.9 GB. However, when I copied the USB stick image to an actual USB, it requires a greater than 4 GB USB (I think something like 6 GB). Why is that? Is there any advantage using the USB over the LiveCD/DVD?

phsieh2005

On 05/25/2010 03:06 PM, phsieh2005 wrote:
> I built both the USB stick/hard disk image and the LiveCD/DVD image.
> The size of the USB stick image is about 1.1 GB while the size of the
> LiveCD/DVD is about 0.9 GB. However, when I copied the USB stick image
> to an actual USB, it requires a greater than 4 GB USB (I think something
> like 6 GB). Why is that?

1.1 GB is the compressed size, and 6 GB is the uncompressed size.

Cheers,
James

Hi,

I did not see differences between the two in terms of performance. My thinking is that although the USB disk image is un-compressed, it takes longer time to load into memory, while the LiveDVD transfers the compressed file to RAM faster but takes time to uncompress.

Is there any particular reason to use USB disk image over LiveDVD?

phsieh2005

Hi
Netbooks and systems without a cd/dvd drive :wink:


Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.27.45-0.1-default
up 9 days 16:20, 2 users, load average: 0.10, 0.07, 0.02
GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - CUDA Driver Version: 195.36.15