I noticed that the dvd iso (2017-10-10) is 4,30x,xxx,xxx guessing that they were probably aiming to stay under 2^32 or 4,294,967,296 otherwise why be so close to the 4GB size. So it doesn’t fit on FAT32.
The image will likely still burn to a standard DVD optical disk.
Over the years, it’s always been possible although you might have to use a different burning app than what is provided by default by the installed Desktop.
TSU
Hi
Target is less that 4.7, it’s not fat if you run fdisk over it… if they start going USB, I think they are worried about image size (was some ML discussion awhile back)…
I have an image from last year…
4688183296 Jul 11 2016 openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20160709-Media.iso
sbin/fdisk -l openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20160709-Media.iso
Disk openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20160709-Media.iso: 4.4 GiB, 4688183296 bytes, 9156608 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0x74e7435b
Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20160709-Media.iso1 3888 11447 7560 3.7M ef EFI (FAT-12/16/32)
openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20160709-Media.iso2 * 11448 9156607 9145160 4.4G 17 Hidden HPFS/NTFS
This maybe a dumb remark, just curious, but why should it fit on a FAT32 file system?
If you want to use the “live-fat-stick” script, or something similar, so that you can boot several isos from a single usb flash drive, then you might want each iso to be small enough to fit the limitations of FAT32 file systems.
Sounds to me like "if we would have a bottle of Coca Cola, we would have a rum-coals if we would have rum. rotfl!
Maybe the next one comes and complains it does not fit on a CD.
My personal idea is that the developers are right to not take into account the limitations of such old devices / file systems (not even a Linux one). IIRC it is already for years that the size of a DVD is the restriction used. And that means they already have to decide what to make a selection of the packages that are in the on-line repos. I assume they will not make the ISO smaller. I even assume the ISO will grow further when in the future the use of DVDs for installation will be given over to other USB storage devices more and more.
I agree with that.
However, there are people out there who are used to putting several isos on a single fat stick. The ubuntu media seem to be small enough. And the person who came up with the “live-fat-stick” script now also has 'live-grub-stick" which supports other file systems (such as “ext2”).
Just an observation from the fact that the ISO is just slightly over 4GB versus hovering below dvd’s 4.7GB size. I was just wondering the intention was in fact to stay under 4GB. (For myself, it means I had to zip the file to drop it onto my usb keychain drive.)
On Tue 17 Oct 2017 08:56:01 PM CDT, xorbe wrote:
hcvv;2841846 Wrote:
> This maybe a dumb remark, just curious, but why should it fit on a
> FAT32 file system?
Just an observation from the fact that the ISO is just slightly over 4GB
versus hovering below dvd’s 4.7GB size. I was just wondering the
intention was in fact to stay under 4GB. (For myself, it means I had
to zip the file to drop it onto my usb keychain drive.)
Hi
It was to fit the expanded image on a 4GB USB device, swings and
roundabouts (most folks have => 8GB devices?)… You would need to
browse the Factory ML to find the discussion.
–
Cheers Malcolm °¿° SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE Leap 42.2|GNOME 3.20.2|4.4.87-18.29-default
If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
please show your appreciation and click on the star below… Thanks!
How unfortunate that the USB device image is less than 4GB but greater than 4GB when packages up as ISO! :\