Re: LTSP 5.3 will be tagged tomorrow at 19:00 UTC
Stéphane Graber <stgraber-GeWIH/[email protected]> Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:57:40 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.terminal-server.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 02/16/2012 02:40 AM, Michael Shigorin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 02:17:37PM -0500, St?phane Graber wrote:
>>>> and move most ltsp-build-client plugins into init scripts
>>>> running at boot time on the client.
>>> Should have a look, what's the boot time impact like if it got
>>> measured already?
>> It's mostly removing files and moving some others, so if it takes
>> more than a second, I'd be worried (as in, we're doing something
>> wrong).
>
> Erm, wouldn't mv on overlay (rw is overlay, right?) increase memory
> consumption?
Indeed, though a rm or a mv will only update the filesystem metadata,
so we're talking a few bytes here, creating new files will take a bit
of space, but considering the total size of ltsp-trunk/client being of
700K, I wouldn't worry about it :)
I guess the change to doing stuff at boot time, will probably use an
extra 100-150K of RAM.
>> The main advantage of this is that you can in theory install the
>> LTSP packages on a regular desktop machine and they won't do
>> anything, unless you reboot it with init=/sbin/init-ltsp, then it
>> turns into a thin client but without actually touching anything
>> on the disk. The goal for Ubuntu 12.10 is to basically have the
>> ltsp-client packages installed by default on Edubuntu, allowing
>> to simply export our install media as a fat chroot, so no more
>> shipping chroots and building chroots (for the most common
>> cases).
>
> Discussed yesterday with the colleague who did the heavy lifting on
> ALTSP back then -- he's thinking in rather similar direction; I
> reminded him that flexibility and universality likes to come for a
> price in complexity and resources. Current infrastructure does
> allow for both ways to coexist but it's internal forking.
>
> OK, I should first grok the changes (and not just `bzr pull`), and
> any notional discussion should wait until tomorrow at least.
>
>> I obviously don't have any authority to impose that to the other
>> LTSP developers
>
> Hey, I barely qualify as one in the first place, so that was more
> of a query of the driving forces and whether there's sense in maint
> branches for 5.x -- for packages, I do have those, but for the
> common ground, I don't know whether it's reasonable yet.
>
>> so at this point, I'm just hoping other contributors will see a
>> 20 days to a month period after 5.3 is released as a good idea
>> and as something beneficial for LTSP upstream as a whole.
>
> I consider doing some sort of facelift/release in roughly similar
> timeframe but have no problem releasing 5.2-based packages if the
> effort to forward-port the diff and prepare for yet another merge
> would take too much time before ~April.
>
- --
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=11qo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_____________________________________________________________________
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