Re: localapps to speedy ?

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:58:16AM +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> On Fr, 2008-08-15 at 11:12 -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 03:46:06PM +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> > > On Do, 2008-08-14 at 09:39 -0400, Gideon Romm wrote:
> > > > Exec=xprop ... set "LTSP_COMMAND" <application name>
> > > > 
> > > > in which case, there would be no server-side script.
> > > right that was the plan and what i explained at the hackfest ...
> > 
> > i don't really see that as not server-side, but merely shifting the
> > burden to the system administrator having to maintain all their .desktop
> > files.

> can you elaborate why ? the apps, the .desktop files, the overlay mount,
> the scripts modifying the .desktpo files in use will all 100% be client
> sided ? where exactly is the part you see server sided ? 

i simply thought the .desktop files were on the server. apparently,
that's not the implementation discussed. this particular aspect of the
localapps architecture isn't well documented, as far as i can tell.

seems like we need some place to document it. a number of changes have
been made since the proposed spec in sevilla:

  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ltsp/+spec/ltsp-localapps
  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ltsp-localapps

i don't know if that's the appropriate place, and just needs to be
updated, or if something else is more appropriate.

> and where exactly is the part you see the admin having to touch *any*
> file for the setup we discussed at the hackfest ?  the idea was that
> all aps having a .desktop file installed in teh chroot will
> automatically replace teh menu entries unless the admin disables that
> ... so that you can instal teh apps and tehy will *automatically* and
> *transparently* replace the menu entries for the users, through
> modified .desktop files in a mounted overlay in their homedir that
> override the server ones through a .menu file ... 

i wasn't a part of those discussions, it seems.

> i cant realy belive that we are still discussing that, we defined all
> that in seville 1.,5 years ago and discussed it about ten times since at
> different occasions with the different developers in place ... over and
> over with always getting to the same result ... where is the part thats
> not understood ? 

apparently, there is some disconnect in communication, then.

sorry to add to the confusion, but i just didn't know what was going on.
:)

live well,
  vagrant

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-developer mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-developer
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net