Re: Reduce "Core" to 1 Binary CD? -- WAS: Request for Packages in Fedora Core 3
by Bryan Smith
Willem Riede wrote:
> One thing I'm still not sure I understand:
> Are you advocating a separate CD image,
Well, to start, I'm not advocating anything for Fedora itself.
Although the thread started with Stephen Pritchard making a
comment, and I built upon them, ultimately I'm not in a position
to even do so right now.
Although I started with reducing Core, or reorganizing Core CD #1,
that is no longer the case. So read on, I see your questions as very
good ones.
> or an additional, separate, package set in comps that you can
> choose to install, in which case you happen to only need CD 1?
Again, good questions. Here's the deal:
1. I'm creating a separate package set in comps.xml
2. I will use that package set to create a "Quark" CD
3. This CD will be well under the 500MB or so of packages one
normally fits on a CD (plus the Anaconda installer)
4. I'm also (eventually) build a "Quark builder" so it is easy
to build a "full" CD customized #1
Depending on the merits of "Quark," we _may_ then have:
5. The Fedora "Core" team may end up using "Quark" to create
Fedora "Core" CD #1, including the additional sets from
Quark's comps.xml
But I'll leave that to when Fedora "Quark" is no longer vaporware.
I've stepped back and recognized that everyone will disagree
on what a "full" CD #1 should be. So that's why I've pulled
back farther and came up with "Quark." I've been through the
August/September 2003 archives and done some other goal setting.
Which is where I came up with Fedora "Quark." It's not an
"assumed functionality" as someone else said, because that
differs between users. But it is a "common denominator" that
_all_ derrived "assumed functionality" is built upon.
I'm starting to look at some of the dependency hell. It has
improved since I did some similar stuff back in RHL 7, but there
are still a few "interesting" ones.
You'll hear from me next when you hear from me next. But I'm
not advocating the Fedora "Core" team or the project look at this
again until *I* actually start producing more than vapor. I'm
off the summer (I'm a school teacher) so I have the time.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 10 months
Re: Reduce "Core" to 1 Binary CD? -- WAS: Request for Packages in Fedora Core 3
by Bryan Smith
Willem Riede wrote:
> Why? I've read the barrage of mails this triggered, and I see
> absolutely no benefit. I can understand the desire to have a more
> minimal "minimal" install package set, and the packages that would be
> in that set will probably all sit on the first CD. But that doesn't
> translate into the need to limit the size of the distribution.
For companies who need a "base" to start with, I disagree. Not many
companies want to install the entire "Core." And by maintaining a
local "Apt" repository, there is little need to either.
> Convenience for those of us (like me) that use a more extensive
> package set should not be compromised.
And it will not since "Core" itself will _not_ be touched.
I too like to install the _full_ Fedora "Core" on my personal
workstations and servers at home.
But for a corporation which maintains its own configuration management,
this is not good IMHO.
That's why I suggested making this subset separate. I called it
Fedora "Quark." It is the "common denominator" that all other,
customized systems can be built from using other "Core" packages,
while offering a basic GUI (which the 90MB "minimal" install
does not).
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 10 months
rawhide report: 20040531 changes
by Build System
Updated Packages:
bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-4
---------------------------
* Sun May 30 2004 Florian La Roche <Florian.LaRoche(a)redhat.de>
- change post/postun scripts
gaim-0.78-2
-----------
* Sun May 30 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> 0.78-2
- update to 0.78 (without SILC support for now)
kernel-2.6.6-1.403
------------------
* Sun May 30 2004 Arjan van de Ven <arjanv(a)redhat.com>
- 2.6.7-rc2
- set the ACPI OS name to "Microsoft Windows XP" for better compatibility
rpmdb-fedora-2-0.20040531
-------------------------
19 years, 10 months
Howto use the "pxeboot" directory?
by Mac
Hello devel-list,
I'm trying to install FC2 from my FAT driver without CDs/USBStorages, but FC2 doesn't supply a comfortable way to do so.
And I tried to use the vmlinuz and initrd.img in the directory of /images/pxeboot with the help of LOADLIN, but failed.
How to use the files in "pxeboot" directory?
How to install FC2 from FAT-Formatted Harddrive without burning CDs.
Thanks.
Mac
macshy(a)tom.com
2004-05-31
19 years, 10 months
VPN solution(s) for Fedora Core
by Jason Tackaberry
Hello Fedora hackers,
Since CIPE's removal from Fedora Core, there is a noticeable void that
still needs to be filled. I'd like to raise the issue here and spark a
discussion in the hope that we can find consensus on one or more pieces
of VPN software to include in Fedora Core 3.
There seem to be two general approaches to VPNs, each with their own
advantages and disadvantages: kernel space, and user space. I feel the
only kernel solutions worth considering are those which implement IPsec.
There exist several packages implementing VPN solutions in userspace,
such as vtun, tinc, and OpenVPN.
I have been using and reading about OpenVPN (http://openvpn.sf.net). It
is intuitive, well designed [1], and has excellent documentation. It is
released under the GPL, with a special exception clause to allow linking
with OpenSSL. OpenVPN is quality software, and we would be remiss not to
consider it for inclusion in FC3.
CIPE, vtun, and tinc, at least, have known and published flaws. Last
year Peter Gutmann wrote a paper detailing a number of problems with
these packages [2]. While Gutmann did not review OpenVPN in depth, he
did have this to say about it:
The key management step (that is, how to get from the SSL
control channel to the data channel) is documented only in the
source code, which I don't feel like reverse-engineering, but a
quick look through it indicates that the author knows what he's
doing.
I've done some googling and unfortunately I can't find a thorough,
independent audit of OpenVPN's design. However, I've also not been able
to find much in way of vulnerabilities, so it appears to have a good
track record. This, in combination with Gutmann's remarks in his paper,
as well as my own understanding of its design, gives me a reasonable
amount of confidence in OpenVPN. (Vastly more than CIPE, at least,
which was included in RHL in the past.)
OpenVPN is released for most unices (including OS X), as well as Windows
2000/XP. It relies on the kernel only for the tun/tap device. I have
toyed with other VPN software (notable CIPE, vtun, and freeswan), and
OpenVPN was the only one that Just Worked, and worked intuitively.
I think the other main contender for VPN software in Fedora Core would
be Openswan. OpenVPN is portable, comfortable (being in userspace),
flexible, and easy, but Openswan implements IPsec which is (mostly)
standardized across vendors, and that's certainly a strong selling
point, in spite of its complexity.
I don't know much about Openswan, but I do feel that there is room for
both an IPsec and user space VPN solution in FC.
So, let the discussions begin!
Cheers,
Jason.
[1] I am not a cryptographer, and so my opinion of OpenVPN's
design is meaningless in practice.
[2] http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/linux_vpn.txt
19 years, 10 months
Re: Making Fedora Core CD #1 Standalone -- the "common denominator"
by Bryan Smith
Chris Chabot wrote:
> Ah finaly something we disagree on :-) Small is suprisingly easy to
> accomplish.. However to make this install usefull to to the average
> user, thats something different i.m.o.
> We might not share the same vision here.. I envision a 1 CD
> instalation that allows ppl to get up and running, and do all the
> basic server and/or workstation stuff that you would expect.. So basic
> IM, browsing, office document editing, graphic packages, full
> gnome/nautilus with basic utilities.. etc. Not the expanded list that
> makes it 4 cd's, but enough to have the same experiance as you would
> have using Windows 9x / XP.. even just a little more. For a lot of
> people this 1 CD instalation should already be enough to start 'using
> linux'. If after that they want to install another desktop
> envirioment, databases, etc.. then they will need the extra cd's or
> download things from internet repositories.
"Useful" isn't the ultimate goal of Quark, at least what I'm striving
for. I'm looking at a "minimal GUI install." Why?
Everyone will _disagree_ what is "minimal." One company might have
standardized on OpenOffice.org, while another might use CrossOver Office
with MS Office, while another still might not use a word processor
altogether (and use something like LyX or Scribus, etc...).
The idea here is to give corporations a "minimal" install they _always_
plop down on their workstations, then run a script that apt-gets
everything else. Maybe later on we can create a "Quark plus" builder
that fills an ISO with more applications. But it will always be
_customized_ at the end user, not in Fedora "Quark" itself.
Fedora "Quark" should be the 90MB "minimal" install plus GUI and basic
client/service componets for authentication and network access. That's
all. Everything else and you start getting people who differ. ;-ppp
> Thus my 'quark' (to use your definition) vision is different from
> yours.. While i like the concept of "just basics please", i can see
> this confusing people why they have to download the 4 cd's anyway
> (thus not solving that problem). While for advanced users this
> pure-basics 1 cd usefull, i think it misses the point for the "average
> user"
You're talking to the guy that cuts DVD-Rs with both Fedora "Core" and
"Extras" on it. ;-ppp
But for "Quark," I'm not looking at the "average user." I'm looking at:
1. The IT Professional who wants a "common base"
2. The Developer who wants to know what libraries to "aim for"
And other details. Once we define what Fedora "Quark" is, we can give
more flexibility (like that "Quark plus" builder script I mentioned).
But right now we need to define what should be in Quark itself -- a
common base that _no_one_ will disagree with what is included, and
can grow to include more basic packages in the future.
> I gues a terminology i'd use to describe my 1st cd vision is 'assumed
> functionality'.
And you're right, that's where we differ.
"Assumed functionality" differs between different users.
I'm talking about the minimal GUI/client/service install that _all_
"assumed functionality" will _always_ have.
I'm not just talking about fitting a distro on 1 CD.
That can be done with tools already out there.
And you can do this by taking Fedora "Quark" and adding what you want to
fit on 1 CD. The same for anyone else. The key here is to define that
"Quark" that has packages that will be in _all_ offspring.
> Last argument i have on this is wasting CD space.. if CD1 only has
> 200Mb of stuff on it, there's a big risk this will add another cd to
> the instalation, and thus be more expensive to publish/burn, make for
> more cd swapping, and make ppl scream bloat even more then they do
> now..
And that's where the "Quark plus" comes in. You have "Quark," and then
you bundle other stuff on it with the "Quark plus" builder. The key is
that the _end_user_ does this, not the "Quark" spec.
This could eventually be part of the Fedora "Core" builder. Fedora is
built upon "Quark" and all the popular stuff added into CD #1. But I'm
looking ahead of the game, but that is an eventual goal.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 10 months
Missing ethereal after installation of FC2
by Casper Pedersen
Hi,
I have found a bug in ethereal-0.10.3.2 which is installed with FC2.
I've filed bug 124721, and here is the fix for it(also attached to the
bug):
*** ethereal.spec.orig 2004-04-15 16:45:44.000000000 +0200
--- ethereal.spec 2004-05-30 17:35:18.242635656 +0200
***************
*** 111,116 ****
--- 111,118 ----
%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
%doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog INSTALL NEWS README* doc/
+ %{_bindir}/ethereal
+ %{_sbindir}/ethereal
%{_sbindir}/editcap
%{_sbindir}/idl2eth
%{_sbindir}/tethereal
Regards/Casper
--
GPG Public key is available from: http://www.keyserver.net/
Fingerprint = 56ED 74A4 7B00 20E2 B493 0C1A 6B4E BF8F A086 FE57
19 years, 10 months
QA Application XML save formats.
by Toshio Kuratomi
Hi,
I've got a first cut of an xml save format for my QA Assistant App. If
Aurélien, Erik, and others interested in tools that help write QA
reports want to take a look, I'd be glad of any input. I'm only a
novice xml author so my format could probably use some work.
The save format has three main elements:
* A checklist that specifies the checklist this save file was created
with.
* Properties associated with this instance of a checklist (SRPM
filename, bugzilla number, etc).
* Checklist entries that have been modified.
My program uses this information to load the original checklist and then
overlay the modifications that make up this instance of the checklist.
DTD and sample file are attached and at:
http://qa-assistant.sf.net/qasave/0.1/qasave.dtd
http://qa-assistant.sf.net/qasave/0.1/sample-save.xml
Checklist DTD the qasave file is intended to work with and a checklist
that tries to conform to the Fedora QA checklist are at:
http://qa-assistant.sf.net/checklist/0.2/checklist.dtd
http://qa-assistant.sf.net/lists/fedoraus.xml
-Toshio
--
_______S________U________B________L________I________M________E_______
t o s h i o + t i k i - l o u n g e . c o m
GA->ME 1999
19 years, 10 months
small improvements for fedora 3: sound mixing
by Christian Paratschek
hi people on this list, i am a new member!
first of all: fedora core 2 is a very fine system. i have been an avid
user of red hat 7.3, 8.0,9 and fc1 and i am quite a loyal user...
i have some small gripes with fc2 and i wanna tell you, so that fc3 is
an even better product:
a default fc2 install doesn't mix sound events, i.e. i run xmms,
rhythmbox, etc and my gaim sounds don't play (here the bug is most
obvious). there is a simple fix for this, described on fedoranews.org:
http://fedoranews.org/contributors/andre_costa/alsa/
i didn't even have to do all the stuff mentioned there, i just had to
create the .asoundrc file and put that into it:
pcm.!default {
type plug
slave.pcm "swmixer"
}
pcm.swmixer {
type dmix
ipc_key 1234
slave {
pcm "hw:0,0"
period_time 0
period_size 1024
buffer_size 4096
rate 44100
}
}
and then it worked without further configuration with all of xmms,
rhythmbox, gaim, totem in all combinations.
sound mixing is, imho a very essential feature, because not having it
makes fc2 look unpolished. if the fix is easy, i would suggest turning
the mixing on for fc3. we have kernel 2.6, we have alsa, this should
"just work".
regards,
christian
19 years, 10 months