[SOLVED] Is there difference between a Live USB and a installation to a USB
PuppyThis forum is for the discussion of Puppy Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Is there difference between a Live USB and a installation to a USB
I'm wondering if there is a difference in making a Live USB (using a usb as a LiveCD by "burning" the .iso-file to a usb drive) and installing Puppy Linix to a usb-drive by using the Live Cd and the universal installer.
Usually a live cd doesn't take modifications well and is specifically setup to run from a non-changeable (or includes special settings to incorporate the changes) format. Installation to a usb drive would function like any other linux installation.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
Is there difference between a Live USB and a installation to a USB
