== Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

All Gurus once were Newbies
Forum rules
There are no such things as "stupid" questions. However if you think your question is a bit stupid, then this is the right place for you to post it. Please stick to easy to-the-point questions that you feel people can answer fast. For long and complicated questions prefer the other forums within the support section.
Before you post please read how to get help
rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

== Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:15 am

Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install
Pros of each on say a 4GB USB (SD card)?
Please correct / add your own.
With respect to security, backup, ease of use, or whatever?
Thanks

Edit:
OK, rather than "Pros of each" maybe better to have a
Best Choice for each category.
Security:
Bootable on Multiple Systems:
Write Cycle Wear on the USB Device:
Less RAM and CPU cycles / Better Performance: >> Full Install
Ease of Updating / Managing Content: >> Full Install
Less Space Usage: >> Live (unless Full Install was trimmed a lot)
Ease of Backup / Cloning: >> Live (unless Full Install was trimmed a lot)
Last edited by rtrt on Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:02 pm, edited 7 times in total.

remoulder
Level 17
Level 17
Posts: 7638
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 1:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by remoulder » Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:28 am

Is this meant to be a question?
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.

“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:48 am

I need advise from experts.
This will hopefully help others.
So yes, a question or request for advice.

Such as:
Possibly a Full Install can also boot from any system??
I don't know, so please correct me if wrong.
Thanks

remoulder
Level 17
Level 17
Posts: 7638
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 1:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by remoulder » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:15 am

Searching here and the tutorials sections should give you the answers you want.
[Edit] your original post and add [SOLVED] once your question is resolved.

“The people are my God” stressing the factor determining man’s destiny lies within man not in anything outside man, and thereby defining man as the dominator and remoulder of the world.

User avatar
Webtest
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:45 pm
Location: Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by Webtest » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:21 am

I run Mint exclusively as a LiveCD system from flash media. I started with Mint 8 which runs beautifully on my HP dx2400 system/Dell 1920x1080 LCD display, and I still run it regularly from a locked SD card for fast booting and secure web browsing (http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=44948). I tried Mint 9, but couldn't get it to run properly and so abandoned that version. When Mint 10 came out with codecs to support DVDs I tried it, and it worked fine except the "Print Screen" function is broken, which annoys me greatly. However, I use it when I want to do anything with video files.

So, my response is: I don't think all versions of Mint LiveCD/DVD will work on all systems ... at least I had trouble with Mint 9 on my system. I haven't had much of a reason to try 11 or 12, but I vaguely recall seeing something about the newest versions of Mint Live systems embedding specific display parameters in the boot process that may be incompatible with some systems ... but I may be wrong.

Good luck ...
Blessings in abundance, all the best, & ENJOY!
Art in Carlisle PA USA
BOAT - a hole in the water that you pour money into
LINUX - a hole in your life that you pour TIME into

HP dx2400 Core 2 Duo 4 GB - Mint 10 Gnome, Mint 13/15/17.x/18.x Mate <on LOCKED SD cards, and Kanguru USB drives>

User avatar
Pilosopong Tasyo
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:26 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by Pilosopong Tasyo » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:27 am

I never tried doing a full install on flash memory-based media (memory cards and USB flash drives) before and would advise against doing it. Your memory card/UFD is not going to last long with all the write cycles going on while using it. Better if Mint is installed as a live version for such media.
o Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime!
o If an issue has been fixed, please edit your first post and add the word [SOLVED].

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:39 am

remoulder wrote:Searching here and the tutorials sections should give you the answers you want.
I have been searching and didn't see a basic summary of these 2 compared.

If a Full Install does still have the ability to run on any system and is better with respect to space usage, security, etc., then maybe there is no reason to mess with the Live+casper-rw approach.

And if so, then no point in trying to compare them -- other than to put the question out there (in the subject line) and get it answered.

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:44 am

Pilosopong Tasyo wrote:I never tried doing a full install on flash memory-based media (memory cards and USB flash drives) before and would advise against doing it. Your memory card/UFD is not going to last long with all the write cycles going on while using it. Better if Mint is installed as a live version for such media.
Thought I read somewhere that there were more writes to the casper-rw on a live than to a full install. Any more thoughts on this?
Thanks

User avatar
Pilosopong Tasyo
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:26 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by Pilosopong Tasyo » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:10 am

rtrt wrote:Thought I read somewhere that there were more writes to the casper-rw on a live than to a full install.
AFAIK, casper-rw is used if you want to enable persistence on flash media so you can save files, customize settings, etc. The "write cycles" I was referring to earlier refers more to OS-initiated writes, such as log files, temps and other operations that requires the OS to write on the media. In a "live" setting, everything is "written" to RAM, just like what happens when using a Live CD. The only time flash media is accessed is when the OS needs to read/access/load code into RAM.

Read cycles don't hurt flash media. It's the write cycles that shorten it's lifespan.
o Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime!
o If an issue has been fixed, please edit your first post and add the word [SOLVED].

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:12 am

Edit added to first post of this thread:
OK, maybe better to have a
Best Choice for each category.
Security:
Boot Speed:
Ease of Updating / Managing Content:
Space Usage:
Ease of Backup / Cloning:
Bootable on Multiple Systems:
Write Cycle Wear on the USB Device:
Last edited by rtrt on Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pilosopong Tasyo
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:26 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by Pilosopong Tasyo » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:16 am

rtrt wrote:Edit added to first post of this thread...
Oh God, awful choice of color! Please don't use yellow on a light background. It's hard to read. Re-edit your first post. :shock:
o Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime!
o If an issue has been fixed, please edit your first post and add the word [SOLVED].

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:20 am

Pilosopong Tasyo wrote:AFAIK, casper-rw is used if you want to enable persistence on flash media so you can save files, customize settings, etc.
Yes, this is the only kind of setup I would want to do. And this is why I would consider a Full Install -- to have all these settings saved.
I should have stated that.

So to be clear:
This is Live+casper-rw -Vs- Full Install

Thanks

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:27 am

Pilosopong Tasyo wrote:Please don't use yellow on a light background. It's hard to read. Re-edit your first post. :shock:
Corrected. I was trying to blank it out a little. No strike-through option.
Last edited by rtrt on Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

truexfan81
Level 3
Level 3
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 7:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by truexfan81 » Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:22 pm

This is not really an answer to your question, just something i felt i could contribute.

When using casper-rw are you using the file that is created by a usb creator?

There is an alternative if you want to have persistance with a live usb, you can actually make a casper-rw partition, if setup correctly it will use it for persistance, and will not be limited to 4GB. i once set one up to have a 120GB casper-rw partition :lol:

also the link below says it has to be formatted to ext2, i never had a problem doing that with ext4.

one downside i have found to running live with persistance is that not all updates can be successfully installed.

instructions:

http://www.pendrivelinux.com/create-a-l ... partition/

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:30 pm

truexfan81 wrote: one downside i have found to running live with persistance is that not all updates can be successfully installed.
Yes, I'm guessing the Full Install is going to be the clear best choice for updating.
Thanks

truexfan81
Level 3
Level 3
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 7:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by truexfan81 » Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:33 pm

rtrt wrote:
truexfan81 wrote: one downside i have found to running live with persistance is that not all updates can be successfully installed.
Yes, I'm guessing the Full Install is going to be the clear best choice for updating.
Thanks
glad i could finally give back :lol: yeah most of them would install fine, there were just maybe 3 of them that would not install correctly, i never could figure out how to fix it. i was just playing with it on the acer netbook, so i usually just ended up formatting the persistance and starting over :lol:

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:08 am

truexfan81 wrote: so i usually just ended up formatting the persistance and starting over
Its great to have input from those who have tried several flavors. I'll go ahead and update first post to reflect Full Install as best for updating.
Thanks

rtrt
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:42 am

Re: == Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by rtrt » Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:34 am

With respect to Ease of Backup / Cloning.
I guess the best choice would be the Full Install because:
1 – There would not be a large casper-RW that could be mostly zeros.
2 – No separate partition to back up if you did the casper-RW that way.
3 – Ability to remove unwanted apps that would just take up space.

But some questions on this though:
From what I understand, all the apps that come with the “Desktop” are part of a compressed file within the distribution. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
So, on a full install, would the apps still be compressed / is there an option to keep them that way?
Or an option to recompress them after some have been removed or added?
Space comparison if not able to keep them compressed?
Thanks

truexfan81
Level 3
Level 3
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 7:40 pm
Contact:

Re: == Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by truexfan81 » Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:50 am

rtrt wrote:With respect to Ease of Backup / Cloning.
I guess the best choice would be the Full Install because:
1 – There would not be a large casper-RW that could be mostly zeros.
2 – No separate partition to back up if you did the casper-RW that way.
3 – Ability to remove unwanted apps that would just take up space.

But some questions on this though:
From what I understand, all the apps that come with the “Desktop” are part of a compressed file within the distribution. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
So, on a full install, would the apps still be compressed / is there an option to keep them that way?
Or an option to recompress them after some have been removed or added?
Space comparison if not able to keep them compressed?
Thanks
So, on a full install, would the apps still be compressed / is there an option to keep them that way?
No, on a full install the apps are decompressed during the install.

As for the option to keep them compressed i have not seen one. Perhaps one of the more experienced members would know.

User avatar
Pilosopong Tasyo
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:26 am
Location: Philippines

Re: == Mint on USB == Live -vs- Full Install

Post by Pilosopong Tasyo » Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:17 pm

rtrt wrote:So, on a full install, would the apps still be compressed / is there an option to keep them that way? Or an option to recompress them after some have been removed or added? Space comparison if not able to keep them compressed?
This concept reminded me of Stacker and Doublespace/Drivespace from the DOS era. The closest I can think of keeping apps compressed is to just run the OS as a live session. If apps are added/removed just do a remaster of the customizations and rewrite the ISO as a Live USB. Making a full (uncompressed) installation on flash media will eat as much space as you would do a full install on a hard drive. One thing you have to keep in mind is that compressed data needs to be decompressed when the need to use it arises. Decompression requires RAM and CPU cycles. Lots of it. This will slow things down considerably. Even if there is a Stacker/Doublespace/Drivespace-like tool that does it on a full installation, running it would then be no different vis-a-vis to running a live session, speedwise.
o Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime!
o If an issue has been fixed, please edit your first post and add the word [SOLVED].

Post Reply

Return to “Newbie Questions”