IRC chat logs for #ltsp on irc.freenode.net (webchat)


Channel log from 3 November 2007   (all times are UTC)

00:13ogra_cmpc has joined #ltsp
01:21Joris has joined #ltsp
01:28cyberorg_ is now known as cyberorg
01:52cyberorg has quit IRC
02:08cyberorg has joined #ltsp
03:00iMav has joined #ltsp
03:26Egyptian[Home] has joined #ltsp
03:39iMav has quit IRC
03:54Q-FUNK has joined #ltsp
04:18plamengr has joined #ltsp
05:20K_O-Gnom has joined #ltsp
05:29Amaranth has quit IRC
06:03fernando1 has quit IRC
06:13Weric has joined #ltsp
06:16J45p3r has joined #ltsp
06:19fernando1 has joined #ltsp
06:20Weric has left #ltsp
06:28irk has joined #ltsp
06:29irk is now known as moquist
07:12ogra_cmpc has quit IRC
07:18frownix has joined #ltsp
07:25F-GT has quit IRC
07:25F-GT has joined #ltsp
07:34MagicStorm has joined #ltsp
07:34esperegu has joined #ltsp
07:34
<esperegu>
saluton chiuj!
07:36
is there any info on how much users can be put on a specific cpu? I saw this document but it mainly focuses on ram: http://wiki.ltsp.org/twiki/bin/view/Ltsp/ServerSizing
07:36
(and already a year old.... seems like programs get more demanding every day)
07:44
<frownix>
esperegu: the amount of users/cpu really depends in all on what they are doing/running
07:45
<esperegu>
frownix: I understand that. I am looking for some actual comparison.
07:45
frownix: could a laptop be used as the server?
07:46
<frownix>
esperegu: well, it could, but the laptop hdd and ram would be a big bottleneck, depending on how many users you hook up
07:46
a laptop is just another computer, just with slower disk(s)(normaly)
07:47
<esperegu>
frownix: well.. I suppose one could ad 4GB
07:47
so that would not be a bottleneck I suppose
07:47
<frownix>
the ram can be added, sure..but your disk problably will be pretty slown on the laptop
07:48
<esperegu>
so one should add a faster disk
07:48
any suggestion regarding the number of users ?
07:48
<frownix>
whate are you planning to do? use it for? number of clients?
07:49
<esperegu>
it's for a school
07:49
so they would probably use the same programs
07:49
<frownix>
ok, so you are hoping to add about 20 clients to the server?
07:49
<esperegu>
yeah. per server I think
07:50
I was thinking about 15. so I could use a fanless 1gb desktop switch
07:50
if it could do double that it would even be better.
07:50
<frownix>
hmm, per server..i'm guessing from that, that you are planning a multiple server setup. what's the reason to use laptops as servers then? they should be more expensive then a regular desktop
07:50
<esperegu>
power savings & battery
07:50
it's for a school in africa
07:51
power is always a problem. so otherwise i should need ups etc.
07:51
<frownix>
ok, powersavings could be done on a desktop as well, and a car-battery can be added
07:51
<esperegu>
laptop has already battey
07:51
<frownix>
i think you will have serious problems with a laptop harddrive serving that many clients
07:51
<esperegu>
hmmm
07:52
even with 7200rpm drives?
07:52
<frownix>
then again, it all depends on what you can "live with"
07:52
<esperegu>
frownix: what if I would ad a fileserver for the home dirs?
07:52
would that take load away?
07:53
<frownix>
it would probably help some.what clients are you planning to use?
07:53
old desktops?
07:53
<esperegu>
that's an option. or basic thin clients if they are available for a good price like http://www.devonit.com/
07:54
I understood they are like $100
07:54
<frownix>
the problem with school setups are that most of the the time all clients boot up pretty much at the same time
07:54
so, the server disks will have to give out the apps to the clients at the same time
07:55
so, startup will be slow on a slow disk, in a non-array disk configuration
07:56
<esperegu>
can't part be put into ram then? (maybe use 1gb of the 4gb as a drive)
07:56
<frownix>
those thin-clients are based on via cpu's, and are quite capable of running all apps locally on the workstations
07:56
<esperegu>
with 128mb?
07:57
my ff alone usely takes more
07:57
<frownix>
by putting the workload on the clients instead, you'll take ALL the load of the server(execpt disk load on boot-up)
07:57
<esperegu>
:-)
07:57
<frownix>
you can allways replace the ram to a tad more, like 256, or more
07:57
in the end it's quite cheap with ram, and it will really reduce the server load
07:58
<esperegu>
but have low performance on the clients i gues
07:58
<frownix>
and by using (as you said) ram based disk on the server , it should be fast enough
07:58
<esperegu>
I thought the hole idea of using a server was that it would be fast
07:58
<frownix>
not at all, i'm running all via cpus on the clients, all apps locally
07:59
and it's as fast as any computer(depending on, again; what you run)
07:59
<esperegu>
because normally you can always use the full capacity of the cpu since they are not using it on the same time
07:59
<frownix>
it's allways a trade-off...no solution is better then the other in all cases
08:00
<esperegu>
=)
08:00
<frownix>
it's just such a waste to have a client cpu sitting around doing nothing;-)
08:00
<esperegu>
I thought that local apps would be the ones that have high network load. like video etc.
08:00
true
08:00osl has joined #ltsp
08:01
<esperegu>
but those thin clients do not have really fast cpu's
08:01
is it hard to have certain programs run locally?
08:01
or is that out of the box now?
08:01
<frownix>
in my experience, they are fast enough(i have 1ghz cpu's)
08:01
<esperegu>
(it has been about 4 years since I ran ltsp ;-) )
08:01
<frownix>
i don't know really, i think the ubuntu guys have it worked out pretty good
08:02
my setup isn't ltsp based(only ltsp inspired)
08:02
but I run everything locally on the workstation, including gdm/desktops
08:03
<esperegu>
aha
08:03
<frownix>
and all workstations are via eden 1ghz
08:03
and I can't say that I find that they act slow in any way(for what I'm using them for)
08:04
<esperegu>
for what?
08:04
<frownix>
the server basicly acts as a file-server, and cpu-load is close to 0 on it
08:04
the clients use firefox/mplayer and some other apps
08:04
<esperegu>
I just thought that.
08:05
that's more like network boot you have then right?
08:05
<frownix>
well, sort of, but with the ltsp inspired read-only file system/ramdisk where you need to write setup
08:07
if i'd have slower clients, a more traditional setup with server running apps would have been better
08:07
but the via boxes perform pretty well so it makes more sence to use those
08:07
(in some cases local apps are neccessary though, like for mplayer)
08:07
and firefox with flash, which would kill the network
08:08
<esperegu>
good to know
08:08
but ff normally takes lot's of mem
08:08
<frownix>
well, it uses ram, if it's there
08:08
if not, it uses less
08:09
<esperegu>
how does it do that? will it be slow?
08:09
<frownix>
page caching and what have you
08:09
<esperegu>
donno... standard install =)
08:09
<frownix>
i "think" it cache the pages in ram(previous pages) for faster access on the back button
08:10
so, logicaly, less ram would mean less cache, but still usable
08:11
<esperegu>
aha
08:11
<frownix>
but as for server, the more load on the workstation, the less of a server you need,and the other way around
08:11
not much to do about that
08:11
it's a choise you have to make
08:11
<esperegu>
15 0 231m 121m 26m S 1 6.0 3:15.95 firefox-bin
08:11
<frownix>
20 clients on a single laptop disk will be slow
08:11
<esperegu>
k
08:12
<frownix>
what can you get out of that laptop disk? 20mb/s?
08:12
<esperegu>
donno
08:13
but that's why I was thinking about ram disk
08:13
or maybe seperate server for home dirs
08:13
I want to keep the setup as basic as possible
08:14
<frownix>
the home dirs "sholdn't" be that much of a problem, it's the app loading that takes the disk usage
08:14
<esperegu>
preferable as apt-get install ltsp
08:14
as possible
08:14
<frownix>
checkout the ubuntu ltsp, i think they have an easy setup
08:14
<esperegu>
since the local sysadmins haven't even yet worked with linux
08:14
:-D
08:14
<frownix>
even for local apps
08:14
well, they'll learn;-)
08:14
<esperegu>
yeah
08:15
:-)
08:15
<frownix>
then again, a proper setup shouldn't take much work to maintain
08:15
to use a ramdisk as app disk would take some custom scripts though, since you have to create it maually
08:15
and load the data onto it
08:16
<esperegu>
I understand
08:16
<frownix>
it can be a pain to track down all the libs needed for apps and such too
08:17
<esperegu>
dmm
08:17
hmmm
08:18
<frownix>
i'd really suggest that you skip the laptop idea though, and use a regular desktop as server
08:18
but in the end, it's your choise
08:18
as for battery, it doesn't really help much if the server is running. the clients would be all dead without power anyway
08:18
<esperegu>
maybe I should use a flash disk ;-)
08:18
yeah. but nothing would break
08:18
<frownix>
nothing will break anyway
08:19
use proper filesystems, and you are ok
08:19
and use a UPS with enough power to let the server shutdown clean
08:20
<esperegu>
what about usb sticks?
08:20
<frownix>
no idea on the performance on those
08:20
<esperegu>
but a normal desktop takes much more power than a laptop
08:20
<frownix>
well, the disks take more power
08:21
other then that it's the same
08:21
a p4 is a p4, no matter where it is
08:21
<esperegu>
As far as i know a dual core laptop cpu uses about 30watt max
08:22
and a desktop are about 100
08:22
<frownix>
well, you can use the same cpu in a desktop
08:22
it's just the chassie that is different
08:23
it all depends on what components you are using
08:24
you would allso need to use more servers with a laptop setup, so in the end you'll end up using the same amount of power
08:24
one desktop server with a raid array of disks will do the same job as many laptops
08:25
<esperegu>
k
08:26
but it would be more redundant.
08:26
<frownix>
well, yes
08:26MagicStorm has quit IRC
08:26
<esperegu>
if something breaks there it will take a month to get it repleaced ;-)
08:27
<frownix>
and you'd need it since laptop components doesn't las as long as regular;-)
08:28
<esperegu>
hehe
08:28
<frownix>
hehe
08:29K_O-Gnom has quit IRC
08:32DonSilver has joined #ltsp
09:19osl has quit IRC
09:27cyberorg has quit IRC
09:51cyberorg has joined #ltsp
10:18DonSilver has quit IRC
10:19DonSilver has joined #ltsp
10:38ZiXon has joined #ltsp
10:47MasterOne_ has joined #ltsp
10:47
<MasterOne_>
hi guys
10:48klausade_ has joined #ltsp
10:48
<MasterOne_>
one question concerning the access of local devices (hdd) on a thin client: is it normal, that only the first partition is available, if the device has more than one partition?
10:50Topslack has quit IRC
10:58
<cliebow>
MasterOne_, everyone must be on the road
10:59
give it a couple hours..
11:06
<MasterOne_>
on the road?
11:06DonSilver has quit IRC
11:07DonSilver has joined #ltsp
11:11otavio has quit IRC
11:12dtrask has joined #ltsp
11:12
<dtrask>
cliebow, anyone there yet besides you and Gadi?
11:18otavio has joined #ltsp
11:20moquist has quit IRC
11:23sgtpepper has joined #ltsp
11:24
<sgtpepper>
excuse me
11:24
where can I find the source for ltsp-server-pkg-fedora-0.1-1.i386.rpm
11:24
for localdev support
11:25frownix has quit IRC
11:26otavio has quit IRC
11:26otavio has joined #ltsp
11:34dtrask has quit IRC
11:34sepski has joined #ltsp
11:34sepski_ has joined #ltsp
11:34sepski has quit IRC
11:34sepski_ has quit IRC
11:34sepski has joined #ltsp
11:39fox2k has joined #ltsp
11:50MasterOne_ has quit IRC
11:52
<sgtpepper>
any idea why /home don-t get mounted as rw_
11:52
?
11:53
<cliebow>
sgtpepper, everyone is traVELLING..
11:56
<sgtpepper>
is there an event today?
11:57
cliebow:
12:00sgtpepper has quit IRC
12:06sgtpepper has joined #ltsp
12:06
<sgtpepper>
&join #fedora
12:13
<cliebow>
sqtpepper:jammcq just stuck his head in the door so im ooh
12:14
sgtpepper, pingo..
12:14
<sgtpepper>
cliebow: Can you think of any reason why I can't mount /home on the thin client rw
12:14
just ro
12:15
<cliebow>
how does your exports file look?
12:15^Justin has joined #ltsp
12:15
<cliebow>
in an hour you'll have the whole ltdp by the sea crowd at your disposal
12:15
<^Justin>
what would be some reasons a workstation isn't authorized to connect to the ltsp server?
12:15
<cliebow>
in an hour you'll have the whole ltsp by the sea crowd at your disposal
12:15
<sgtpepper>
cliebow: http://pastebin.com/m70abfabc
12:16
<^Justin>
I keep getting that message when I try to log in.
12:17
<cliebow>
^justin ubuntu ltsp5?
12:17
^justin ubuntu ltsp5??
12:17
gutsy?
12:17
sgtpepper, looks perfectly resectable..
12:18
<sgtpepper>
yes
12:18
but still
12:18
devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw)
12:18
none on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)
12:18
192.168.0.1:/home on /home type nfs (ro,vers=3,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,hard,nolock,proto=udp,timeo=7,retrans=3,sec=sys,addr=192.168.0.1)
12:18
<cliebow>
ill ask ogra/sbalneav etc when i see them..
12:20
<ZiXon>
proto=udp ? why would you want that
12:20
<sgtpepper>
ZiXon: its just the default parameter
12:21
cliebow: I may have to do with the server being x86_64?
12:22
<cliebow>
could very well..
12:22^Justin2 has joined #ltsp
12:22
<^Justin2>
wtf
12:22
<cliebow>
trying to remember if ltspfs is involved
12:22
<^Justin2>
sorry, I got disconnected
12:23
<cliebow>
^justin:is this gutsy?
12:23
^justin2:is this gutsy?
12:23
<^Justin2>
let's see. Edubuntu 7.10, so yeah, gutsy
12:23
<cliebow>
run sudo ltsp-update-sshkeys && sudo ltsp-update-image
12:23
somethinglike that
12:24
your keys are borked
12:25ltspbot has joined #ltsp
12:25
<^Justin2>
oh, was I just missing that then?
12:26
<cliebow>
sometimes the keys dont get sunced
12:26
sometimes the keys dont get synced
12:36^Justin has quit IRC
12:40
<cliebow>
bbl
12:40cliebow has quit IRC
12:41DonSilver has quit IRC
12:42
<^Justin2>
thanks a ton, that fixed the problem
12:45frownix has joined #ltsp
12:47sgtpeppe1 has joined #ltsp
12:50sgtpepper has quit IRC
12:51sgtpeppe1 is now known as sgtpepper
12:51sgtpepper has left #ltsp
12:51sgtpepper has joined #ltsp
12:51
<sgtpepper>
any idea why ltsp refuses to mount home directories rw (read write)?
12:59
cli
13:01topslakr_ has quit IRC
13:06^Justin2 has quit IRC
13:06esperegu has quit IRC
13:21shore1 has joined #ltsp
13:25
<shore1>
Does any of you know what is the current status of distro k12ltsp? Is 7.0 going to be realeased soon or is the whole project on ice? Also what you think: On school using LTSP should I move to some another distro that supports LTSP out of the box?
13:44
<sepski>
shore1, yes
13:44
shore1, i think ltsp5 is only properly implemented on debian and ubuntu atm
13:46
Debian Edu and edubuntu supports ltsp out of the box.
13:46
<sgtpepper>
sepski: maybe you can help me with this
13:46
I'm unable to mount /home read-write
13:46
I checked everything
13:46
the export is with rw
13:47
it was working until I changed the server from 32 bits to 64 bits
13:47
<sepski>
so when you write mount, it shows as ro ?
13:47
and it's not ro in the fstab ?
13:49
<sgtpepper>
no
13:49
is ro in fstab
13:49
actually it is'nt in /tmp/fstab in the client
13:49
is what the mount command shows
13:49
I mount it on another computer, not running ltsp
13:49
and it mounts it rw
13:50
<shore1>
Yes I am stydying could edubuntu replace old K12LTSP release 4.1.1-1 system I have in use. Does edubuntu need more ram than k12ltsp(genrally) from the server or the clients?
13:50klausade_ has quit IRC
13:51ZiXon has quit IRC
13:52
<shore1>
Is there any great differences bitween k12ltsp and edubuntu compared mainly how the clients work? sound, local devices etc...
13:53
And any information how stable the edubuntu has been? the k12ltsp 4.1.1-1 has been rock stable. Uptime now over 401 days on the server and rising.
13:53sgtpepper has quit IRC
13:57
<stgraber>
shore1: you should update your kernel :) Edubuntu Gutsy is only a few weeks old so we don't have long-term install yet. I have been using it on a test classroom (8 computers) since the beginning of the development cycle without any major problem (most problem where things I added to the chroot). But honestly I never used K12LTSP and I'm part of the Ubuntu/Edubuntu devel team (QA team) :)
13:58
shore1: The next Ubuntu release will be a long term support one and so we'll focus on stability and security and avoid introducing to many new things. So if you want something rock solid I would wait for Hardy (April 2008)
14:02
<shore1>
Yes waiting for Hardy is somting I think whery seriously. Do you think how easily I could transfer the k12ltsp to edubuntu? I wonder how the user accounts and settings could be easily transfered..
14:02topslakr_ has joined #ltsp
14:05
<stgraber>
depends on how you currently manage your accounts
14:05
<shore1>
stgraber: Also how usb-stics work in newest edubuntu on the clients? and How about usb-printers? Do they work how nicely on the server and/or is it possible to use them on the terminals too now?
14:06
I used the server to directly manage the accounts and store home directorys.
14:07
<stgraber>
usb-sticks and any mass storage on USB work fine, sound work fine too (you should even be able to use the mic input now), IIRC we have something for printers too but never tried it
14:07
as I usually use some network printers
14:08
ok, so you have local unix accounts, so you'd basically need to make a script reading your /etc/passwd /etc/group /etc/shadow file and creating the user on the new server (or if the uid don't overlapp, simply copy the entries)
14:08
then setting the file/dir permissions (if the uids changed)
14:10
<shore1>
Do you know does Xerox Work Centre pro (if I remember 450 model) work how well on edubuntu? Specially the scannin-documents feature of it.
14:10^Justin has joined #ltsp
14:10
<^Justin>
is PXE the same as Boot ROM?
14:11
<stgraber>
shore1: I have no idea sorry, schools printers/scanner are all HP here
14:11
<shore1>
Its a postscipt printer so with the PPD file it should work? (at least the printing)?
14:12
<lns>
^Justin, PXE is a protocol that bootROMs use
14:12
Etherboot is also a protocol used by bootROMs
14:12
a bootrom is technically the actual ROM chip that NICs have
14:12
<^Justin>
so if I have a NIC on my thin client that says "Boot ROM supported" it would automatically work with PXE?
14:12
okay, thanks
14:12
<lns>
^Justin, well it gets tricky
14:12
i've had a lot of 30 NICs that said they're bootrom SUPPORTED
14:13
but you have to make sure they actually have the ROM in them
14:13
they might just have a socket
14:13
<shore1>
Does the the computer (that has that nic you talking about) say anyting about PXE when it boots?
14:13
<lns>
or "intel boot agent"
14:16
<shore1>
Or is the bootrom in a socket in the NIC's you have(so it can be easily removed)? If not(they are directly soldered to the NIC) then you probaly habe PXE supported NIC's (I think)..
14:20MasterOne_ has joined #ltsp
14:20
<MasterOne_>
anybody present?
14:21
<shore1>
Genreally to LTSP is there any plans or work alredy done to make moving user from teminal to another witout logout login(applications keep running)?
14:21
MasterOne_: Yes
14:22
<MasterOne_>
well :)
14:24
I have two questions
14:25
concerning local devices (hdd on thin client): is it normal, that only the first partition shows up, if the device has more than one partition?
14:26
<stgraber>
IIRC the two partitions of my external HDD are correctly detected (Edubuntu Gutsy)
14:27GodFather has joined #ltsp
14:28
<MasterOne_>
I am running Edubuntu Gutsy as well, I am testing my LTSP5 server setup with a laptop as a thin client, which has an integrated PATA HDD, and that one has several partition, but only "scsidisk-sda1" shows up on my desktop
14:28
I am running Edubuntu Gutsy as well, I am testing my LTSP5 server setup with a laptop as a thin client, which has an integrated PATA HDD, and that one has several partition, but only "scsidisk-sda1" shows up on my desktop
14:29
<stgraber>
hmm, ok so what's the FS for those partitions ?
14:29
<shore1>
stgraber: By they way if booting of ltsp terminal is done using a harddrive. Is it seen by default by the terminal(as a local device)? Can this be controlled on/off by individually by terminal to terminal?
14:30
<MasterOne_>
stgraber: they all are ext3
14:31
<shore1>
stgraber: in edubuntu and also does edubuntu support automatic spindown of terminals the harddrives after the boot?
14:31
<stgraber>
shore1: you can turn on/off the local devices using the lts.conf but then you won't have *any* local device (no USB disk).
14:31
<shore1>
stgraber: thats a big broblem :( Is any fix planned?
14:32
<MasterOne_>
does it matter, if the drive is USB or internal sata/pata?
14:32
<stgraber>
shore1: that's things you may want to fix by hand using the rc.local script or something, the problem is that we would have to scan the content of the partition to check if that's data or a PXE boot loader
14:32
<shore1>
stgraber: Because I use harddrives for booting the terminals. But I dont want the harddrives to be seen as a local devices.
14:32
<MasterOne_>
it's not a problem, because my final thin client will not have any internal hdd, but I am just curious, because I only can se scsidisk-sda1, but not the other partitions
14:33rjune has quit IRC
14:33
<stgraber>
shore1: you can certainly can add an umount line to the client's rc.local so after boot the local disk is unmounted (but that's not really clean ...)
14:34
MasterOne_: it shouldn't matter, but I'm not sure of how the HDD are detected (if that's from udev, parsing the log or scanning the /proc/partitions file)
14:35
<shore1>
I think this should need a proper fix. (like separate the external and internal local device support) and make them terminal on/off selectable.
14:35
atleast
14:36
I still have few olf NT4.0 windows computer that mainly always act like a terminal but they have old windows intect. Just in case that if ther server breaks. The old windows can be used.
14:36
<MasterOne_>
another question: anybody tried running vlc on the LTSP5 server? there has to be a trick, because it somehow can not output any video, which must have something to do with the remote Xsession (maybe defining the video-output-method?), I guess there is a similar issue with mplayer
14:37vagrantc has joined #ltsp
14:38
<shore1>
And another question is there plan to make the vlc work as a video server-client style for the ltsp terminals? So the server would play it but send the video using vlc:s video stream fucntio to the terminal to be seen?
14:39
"almost like" we do with the sound now...
14:40
<stgraber>
shore1: you should be able to do that as soon as we have the localapps by default in LTSP (so you can run VLC on the client listening for broadcasted video then playing them)
14:40
<MasterOne_>
so there is some work going on in that sector?
14:40
<vagrantc>
there is generic work going on that could be applicable.
14:41
<stgraber>
on the localapps yes, not VLC specific though
14:42
<shore1>
has there been any idea to interate VLC in the local apps (after they work ok). Specially by edubuntu? I think it would a killer feature.
14:42
<stgraber>
we didn't spec that for Hardy
14:42
so that'd have to wait till Hardy+1
14:43
<shore1>
the release after hardy?
14:43
too bad it did not make to hardy...
14:44
<stgraber>
the main specs for Hardy (IIRC) are : a GUI to generate/modify the chroot, move edubuntu as add-on to ubuntu, italc integration
14:44
<shore1>
videos are becoming so popular and they realy kille the network and work bad over the network(like it is now).
14:45
<stgraber>
localapps is planned for hardy so you'll be able to run VLC locally on the thin clients instead of the server
14:45
<vagrantc>
shore1: well, like any free software project, you are encouraged to get it working and submit patches :)
14:45
that is usually the best way to get something done.
14:45
<MasterOne_>
still, the problem seems to be, that you can neither start vlc nor mplayer on the server through a thin client, I guess because of the way these players output video or access the graphics card, so I think there is a commandline switch to be added to influence the video output method. I already played around a little, but without success by now
14:45
<stgraber>
if we can make a firefox+flash to work locally, VLC should work the same
14:46
<MasterOne_>
"move edubuntu as add-on to ubuntu" -> does that mean there will be no more separate edubuntu edition any more?
14:46
<stgraber>
MasterOne_: ogra managed to have compiz working on a thin client, so I don't really see what the problem with the video overlay is (I should try that one of those days)
14:47
<MasterOne_>
is firefox+flash already working locally? as I am still testing, I didn't take a look at the local apps matter by now
14:47
<stgraber>
MasterOne_: there will but it'll be a set of education packages and artwork you still on top of Ubuntu
14:47
MasterOne_: we managed to have them working loaclly that week yes :)
14:47
<MasterOne_>
stgraber: is there more info on how to get compiz working on the thin client?
14:48
<stgraber>
MasterOne_: I don't know, you should ask ogra about how he managed to have that to work :) (once he's back on-line)
14:48
<MasterOne_>
so there is a lot of good stuff going on then ;)
14:48
I am totally amazed by LTSP5
14:49
just using a test-setup since a few days, but it is so cool, I am going to assemble a fanless thin client soon ;)
14:49
<shore1>
vagrantc: I know. If I get it working I submit the patches. I just am not a good coder :( The howto using vlc.so as a remote control of the terminals was one of the works I gave back. Hoply some body had use for it.
14:50
vls.so -> vnc.so :D
15:02plamengr has quit IRC
15:08
<vagrantc>
whoah. ubuntu just took debian's LTSP and imported it into hardy.
15:09
<stgraber>
probably the auto-syncer script doing its job
15:10
<vagrantc>
i think there was an exception for ltsp at one point ... or maybe this is the first time the version in debian is actually newer
15:10
there were definitely some things in there that ubuntu did not want.
15:10
and their powerpc buildd is faster than debian's :(
15:14
now ubuntu's ldm only installs the ltsp and Debian themes :)
15:15
i'm sure i'll be hearing ogra grumbling about it next time he's on irc
15:15
but i warned him
15:16
<stgraber>
:)
15:18rjune has joined #ltsp
15:19GodFather has quit IRC
15:22bobby_C has joined #ltsp
15:26bobby_C has joined #ltsp
15:29
<MasterOne_>
I thought Edubuntu has the best LTSP5 implentation
15:29
implementation
15:30
<vagrantc>
!bestltspdistro
15:30
<ltspbot>
vagrantc: "bestltspdistro" is whatever you prefer
15:30
<MasterOne_>
not really true ;
15:30
<vagrantc>
there is no such thing as best
15:30
<MasterOne_>
I tried ubuntu + ltsp-standalone-server as well, but it was not the same thing
15:30
<vagrantc>
this is true.
15:31
for you, apparently edubuntu is better
15:31
<MasterOne_>
Edubuntu has it all right of the box, so why fuss around with any other distro + all the additional setup
15:31
<vagrantc>
because something else about edubuntu doesn't work for you?
15:32
<MasterOne_>
and what would that be?
15:32
<vagrantc>
the upgrade cycle is far too frequent
15:32
for one
15:32
the arywork is cheesy
15:32
artwork
15:33
<MasterOne_>
not necessarily true, you are not forced to upgrade every 6 months, if a release is supported 18 months
15:33
<vagrantc>
i have difficulty with ubuntu, because i am the wrong target audience for ubuntu
15:33* vagrantc is not really interested in debating opinions
15:34* vagrantc would rather get real work done
15:34sepski has quit IRC
15:34
<MasterOne_>
the artwork may look cheesy at first (that's why I also tried to setup LTSP5 on ubuntu, before I came back to edubuntu), but it is really easy for the eyes, and I already like it
15:34
;)
15:34
<vagrantc>
sounds like it works for you :P
15:34
<MasterOne_>
looks like
15:35
although I never was a *ubuntu fan as well, coming from Gentoo
15:35
vagrantc: so you are using debian?
15:35
<vagrantc>
MasterOne_: indeed.
15:36
i've done most of the work on the debian ltsp implementation for the last year or so
15:36
<MasterOne_>
oh
15:38
<vagrantc>
a lot of that work has been taking what ubuntu has done and cleaning it up :)
15:40
<MasterOne_>
are there detailed install instructions for LTSP5 on debian available?
15:40J45p3r has quit IRC
15:40
<vagrantc>
!debian
15:40
<ltspbot>
vagrantc: "debian" is is a GNU/Linux based operating system that makes an excellent LTSP server. You can find it at http://www.debian.org. for information about LTSP on debian see http://wiki.debian.org/LTSP
15:40
<vagrantc>
that's about it
15:41
a little more is also included in the package.
15:41bobby_C has quit IRC
15:43
<vagrantc>
sounds like upstream ltsp is planning on taking the edubuntu documentation and making it more distro-agnostic
15:44^Justin has quit IRC
15:47Q-FUNK has quit IRC
15:58MasterOne_ has quit IRC
17:15Amaranth has joined #ltsp
17:43Egyptian[Home] has quit IRC
18:01joebob777as7 has joined #ltsp
18:02
<joebob777as7>
my mouse is not working on any of my clients... anyone have any idea as to why this is happening?
18:17topslakr_ has quit IRC
18:18
<vagrantc>
joebob777as7: was it working before?
18:21
<joebob777as7>
vagrantc, yeah it was really weird just happened all of the sudden...
18:21
ubuntu gutsy
18:21
<vagrantc>
joebob777as7: you didn't change anything ?
18:24
<joebob777as7>
not to my knowledge... i may have run an update it was last turned on about a week ago so i'm not incredibly clear but it only on one of my chroots... not on both
18:46Topslakr| has joined #ltsp
18:47Topslakr has quit IRC
18:56topslakr has joined #ltsp
19:04vagrantc has quit IRC
19:14frownix has quit IRC
19:35jeremyb1 has joined #ltsp
19:39jeremyb1 has quit IRC
19:41joebob777as7 has quit IRC
19:43moquist has joined #ltsp
19:54vagrantc has joined #ltsp
20:05cliebow has joined #ltsp
20:09jammcq has joined #ltsp
20:09
<jammcq>
hey all
20:10
<jcastro>
hi jammcq!
20:11* vagrantc waves to jammcq
20:16
<jammcq>
For the past several years, the LTSP developers have gotten together in the fall for a developers summit, where we can get synced up with the latest things happening.
20:16
hmm
20:16
not sure how that got pasted
20:16
<vagrantc>
heh
20:16
<jammcq>
we're in Maine right now, and lots of cool stuff happening
20:17* vagrantc 's goals would've been getting upstream tarballs and splitting out ldm into a separate tarball
20:18
<jammcq>
scotty, ogra and warren are working together on upstream-ing ltsp
20:18
heh, that's EXACTLY what they are doing right now
20:18
<rjune>
jammcq !
20:18
<jammcq>
that's prolly the single most important gal for this
20:18
rjune: hey buddy
20:18
<rjune>
the single most important gal?
20:18
<vagrantc>
well, that's GREAT
20:21
<warren>
vagrantc, hey
20:21
vagrantc, so we're talking about putting each component into their own bzr repo
20:21ogra has joined #ltsp
20:21
<vagrantc>
warren: which components?
20:21sbalneav has joined #ltsp
20:22
<sbalneav>
vagrantc: Foo!
20:22
<warren>
vagrantc, client, server, ltspfs, ldm, etc.
20:22
<vagrantc>
warren: i see ldm, ltspfs, and ltsp ... or do people further want to break down ltsp ?
20:22
<jammcq>
s/gal/goal/
20:22
<vagrantc>
gah. i wish i were there.
20:23
<warren>
vagrantc, every little tool like cdpinger would remain in a larger package
20:23
vagrantc, scott says, cdpinger in ltspfs
20:26
<ogra>
all of them
20:26
ldm, ltsp-server ltsp-client, jetpipe
20:26
oh, and ltspfs
20:26
vagrantc, its a shame youre not here ...
20:26
(and that i have such a lag)
20:26
<vagrantc>
eeyk.
20:26
ltsp-server and ltsp-client ?
20:26
<warren>
Source Repositories
20:26
• ldm ldm-gtk-greet
20:26
• ltspfs ltspfsd cdpinger
20:26
• jetpipe
20:26
• ltsp-client (scripts + dependencies)
20:26
• ltsp-server (scripts + dependencies)
20:26
<ogra>
they want to split them
20:27
<vagrantc>
into separate tarballs/bzr repositories ?
20:27
<sbalneav>
right
20:27
<warren>
vagrantc, let me show you my example
20:27dtrask has joined #ltsp
20:27
<warren>
adding stuff to my example
20:27
<dtrask>
bonjour mes bon ami
20:27
<ogra>
raise concerns if you see tham
20:27* ogra tries to be as neutral as possible
20:28fox2k has quit IRC
20:29
<sbalneav>
vagrantc: thoughts?
20:29
<vagrantc>
hmmm... not sure the client and server bits should be separate packages ... ditto for ltspfs and ltspfsd and cdpinger
20:29
<sbalneav>
no
20:30
<ogra>
ltspfs should be one, yes
20:30
<sbalneav>
ltspfs ltspfsd cdpinger all one package
20:30
<vagrantc>
ah!
20:30
<sbalneav>
"filesystem bits" "ldm bits" "printing bits" "client bits" "server bits"
20:30
<vagrantc>
if each line is a single upstream package, i only have concerns about the additional split between ltsp-server and ltsp-client
20:31* ogra deoesnt see the advantage of splitting client and server either, we might end up with incompatible versions here
20:31
<sbalneav>
We'll work it out
20:31
<vagrantc>
otherwise, sounds good to me
20:31
<sbalneav>
It's a little more work for us, in exchange for the ability to pull in other distros more easilyt.
20:31
it's just a bit more housekeeping
20:32* ogra sighs about 5sec lag
20:33
<vagrantc>
ogra: you're not connected to a european irc server or something?
20:33
<sbalneav>
ls
20:33
foo!
20:33
vote time. Let's be democratic :)
20:33
+1
20:34* vagrantc doesn't know what's being plussed
20:34
<sbalneav>
the split into upstream 5 source packages.
20:34
<vagrantc>
well +0.5, i guess.
20:35
i've voiced my concern...
20:35
<sbalneav>
We'll just work through it.
20:35
<vagrantc>
what all distros are represented?
20:35
<sbalneav>
Well, so far, we've got Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora
20:36
<warren>
vagrantc, http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/ltsp-server-vagrant-example.tar.bz2
20:36
vagrantc, ignore the details of the code, filenames and locations, the important thing is the two level Makefile structure.
20:36
vagrantc, the top level is ONLY to tag releases with a version "make tag" based upon a version somewhere in the code. Then you use "make dist" to make a release tarball from that tag.
20:37
vagrantc, the dist directory contains the code.
20:37
vagrantc, make install MODE=fedora DESTDIR=/tmp/directory/for/rpm/packaging/somewhere
20:37
vagrantc, make install MODE=debian
20:38
<ogra>
irc.freenode.net
20:38
that should be a round robin
20:39
<vagrantc>
otavio: you around ?
20:48
ogra: try irc.us.freenode.net ...
20:51dtrask has quit IRC
20:51ogra has quit IRC
20:54ogra has joined #ltsp
21:01
<sbalneav>
vagrantc: Not to worry, We'll have 4 repos
21:01
"ltsp-client + ltsp-server"
21:01
"ldm"
21:01
"ltspfs"
21:01
"jetpipe"
21:01
vagrantc: Seem ok?
21:04
<vagrantc>
sbalneav: sounds great!
21:05
warren: so the make install MODE=foo ....
21:06
warren: that would be done from the directory unpacked from the released tarball ?
21:06
<ogra>
whee
21:06
<warren>
vagrantc, if you build your package from tarball instead of bzr checkout, yes.
21:06
<ogra>
lag is gone
21:06
vagrantc, thanks a lozt
21:06
(or so)
21:07
<vagrantc>
ogra: i noticed that ubuntu synced all the debian stuff for hardy ... which i'm certain you don't want everything
21:07
<warren>
vagrantc, if you build from bzr checkout, make install still works.
21:07
vagrantc, ogra: Would you prefer MODE= or DISTRO=?
21:07
<vagrantc>
warren: sounds good
21:07
at least, in theory :)
21:08
i would prefer DISTRO, but if MODE is in widespread use ...
21:08
i actually haven't really worked on "upstream" development that wasn't closely tied to debian
21:09
cyberorg: you around at all ?
21:10* vagrantc also doesn't want a ton of themes in the upstream ldm tarball
21:10
<vagrantc>
in fact, i think a single example ltsp-related theme is probably sufficient.
21:11
ideally with smallish .png files ...
21:12
ogra: the auto-sync thingy must have happened because this is the first time the version in debian was actually newer than the version in ubuntu, i'm guessing
21:13* vagrantc wonders if it's worth it to call this new thingy LTSP 5.1
21:14
<vagrantc>
jammcq, sbalneav, ogra, warren: y'all got access to a speakerphone ? i could call in sometimes ...
21:14
<warren>
vagrantc, no phone, and cell phone is almost out of reach. completely unreliable =(
21:15
<vagrantc>
ah well ...
21:20ogra1 has joined #ltsp
21:31
<ogra1>
cliebow, http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/gutsy/release/
21:39
<warren>
vagrantc, ogra, ogra1, sbalneav, jammcq: http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/ltsp-upstream/MANIFEST
21:45
<vagrantc>
warren: typo in the T: line for ltspfs
21:45
s,ldm,ltspfs,
21:46
in debian, we split ltsp-client into ltsp-client and ltsp-client-core ...
21:46
i think ubuntu followed suit
21:47ogra has quit IRC
21:47
<vagrantc>
there's also ltsp-server and ltsp-server-standalone
21:47
<warren>
vagrantc, what's the difference between client and client-core?
21:47
<vagrantc>
but as long as upstream doesn't make it difficult to further split these things, i'm fine with the tarball being that way
21:47
<warren>
vagrantc, yeah, you get to choose how you split it.
21:47
<vagrantc>
warren: -core doesn't need X, ltspfs, sound, etc.
21:48
<warren>
vagrantc, what is the benefit of splitting client in that way?
21:48
<vagrantc>
warren: it allows you to have an evnironment that doesn't use X, ltspfs, sound, etc ... just a bare-bones NFS-root (or NBD-root)
21:49
it also allows us to support multiple sound systems in ltsp-client-core, but have a default be defined in ltsp-client
21:49
or multiple FOO systems
21:50
<warren>
vagrantc, ah
21:50
<vagrantc>
then it's also easier to do things like: if FOO is installed, enable FOO
21:50
so you don't have to have configuration files for each feature.
21:51
or rather: if FOO is not defined, but FOO is installed, enable FOO
21:52
we use ltsp for many more things than merely logging into an application server and running applications at freegeek
21:53
so localapps split into it's own source?
21:54
i would think that could just be in the ltsp source ... ?
21:54
<warren>
vagrantc, it was scott's idea
21:54ogra1 has quit IRC
21:55
<sbalneav>
Well, the localapps stuff will need some binaries.
21:55
<vagrantc>
sure
21:55
but so does ltsp ... ?
21:56
<sbalneav>
Since we've split all the binaries stuff into their own repos (ltspfs, ldm, jetpipe) it makes sense that the localapps stuff would be in it's own as well.
21:56
<vagrantc>
so then split out getltscfg too ?
21:57
the main reason i see for splitting the various projects is how much they could stand on their own without ltsp
22:01
<warren>
Scott and I agree that we should keep getltscfg in client
22:01
<sbalneav>
yep
22:01
ltspfs could stand on it's own
22:01
ldm can stand on it's own
22:01
<warren>
It might be useful to build ltsp-client for each architecture independently
22:01
<vagrantc>
localapps stands on it's own, though ?
22:01
<warren>
so we have the flexibility to add other binaries in the future if needed.
22:01
<sbalneav>
jetpipe could become a general hp jetdirect emulator down the road some where
22:02
<vagrantc>
warren: debian re-builds ltsp-client-core for each architecture, and ltsp-client is architecture independent
22:02
<sbalneav>
getltscfg won't ever make sense outside of the ltsp environment.
22:02
<warren>
vagrantc, which is fine.
22:03
<vagrantc>
although currently, ltsp-client-core has big ugly if statements based on architecture stuff
22:03
<warren>
reload http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/ltsp-upstream/MANIFEST
22:03
<cliebow>
ogra1: Thanks
22:03
<vagrantc>
sbalneav: so, by my metric (which certain;y isn't the only one) does localapps stand on it's own ?
22:04davidj has joined #ltsp
22:04ogra has joined #ltsp
22:04
<ogra>
hmm, thats better
22:04
<sbalneav>
Umm
22:05
<vagrantc>
the other metric i would have is: will it be changing faster than the rest of the code base, but still largely remain compatible
22:05
<sbalneav>
It could, if you wanted to remote execute something on the remote end of an X connection.
22:05
Why you'd do it that way as opposed to just ssh is beyond me :)
22:05
<warren>
vagrantc, you also have to think about modular updates
22:05
<rcy>
vagrantc: what else do you use ltsp for at freegeek?
22:06
<sbalneav>
One supposes we could shoe-horn it into ltsp-client, if necessary
22:06
<vagrantc>
rcy: wiping and cloning hard drives, mainly
22:06
<sbalneav>
seeing as how we have getltscfg in there.
22:07
<vagrantc>
sbalneav: i'm just giving it some thought weather it should be split out separately... i'm not too attached either way.
22:07
warren: right. which is a big part of why i wanted ldm split out.
22:08
modular can be good, but we don't want to make it needlessly modular
22:08
as that can make inter-dependencies more difficult
22:08
<sbalneav>
I'll go either way. Someone make up my mind :)
22:08
<vagrantc>
heh
22:09
size, standalone-ness, frequency of updating ... those would be my three factors to split something out
22:10
<rcy>
vagrantc: what software are you using to wipe? i setup ltsp on a drive wipe box using shred at one point
22:10
<vagrantc>
rcy: it's some python wrappers around badblocks, smartmontools and a couple other things ...
22:12
sbalneav: how big do you expect the localapps support to get, compared to the rest of the ltsp codebase?
22:12
sbalneav: the rest that we're not splitting out, that is
22:18
another sub-split i would consider is the ldm-greeters in their own packages ... i.e. you might want to make major changes to the GTK greeter but not touch the QT one, and it would be silly to update the codebase ...
22:20
but that could lead to some crazy compatibility issues ...
22:20
but if the ldm to greeter API were reasonably well established, it shouldn't be an issue
22:21* vagrantc uses API without really knowing if it's appropriate
22:21
<vagrantc>
the ldm to greeter interaction ...
22:25
<ogra>
vagrantc, youre right, but thats still future stuff .... as long as we dont have any other greeter thats vaporthink :)
22:25
we'll split if needed
22:27
<vagrantc>
ogra: sure, but i see the greeters split out in the MANIFEST warren posted, so i comment on it
22:30davidj has quit IRC
22:31cliebow has quit IRC
22:31
<warren>
vagrantc, it is built from the ldm source package, but binary splits it out so you aren't forced to pull in qt if you don't want it.
22:32
<vagrantc>
warren: you actually have a qt greeter, or is it as ogra was saying, just varporware?
22:33
<warren>
vagrantc, vaporware.
22:33
<vagrantc>
ok.
22:34
well, if we did actually have GTK and QT greeters, they might warrant their own source tarball. that was my point.
22:34
<warren>
If it actually happens it can be decided.
22:35
<vagrantc>
otherwise, if you made drastic changes to the GTK greeter, you might make a release of the QT greeter without any changes or some such ...
22:35
or if the GTK greeter was in a state needing to be released but the QT greeter wasn't ...
22:37
anyways...
22:38
overall, i'm very, very happy to be seeing movement on this stuff :)
22:38
<jammcq>
we're happy too :)
22:38
tired... but happy
22:38
<vagrantc>
heh
22:45ogra has quit IRC
22:53lns has quit IRC
23:09
<jammcq>
vagrantc: Gadi's had waaaaaaaay too much to drink and want's to know what you've been up to
23:10sbalneav has quit IRC
23:10
<vagrantc>
jammcq: hmmmm... well ... i've been some places, and done some things, and had some not so good times, and some wonderful times
23:11
<jammcq>
heh
23:11
I'll try and explain that to him
23:12
<vagrantc>
jammcq: i'll be in y'alls general vicinity late november, early december ... buffalo
23:12
<jammcq>
just as soon as he stops giggling
23:12
oh, cool
23:12
ok, time for bed
23:13
<vagrantc>
sleep well
23:13
<jammcq>
thanks
23:13jammcq has quit IRC
23:21ogra has joined #ltsp
23:34Egyptian[Home] has joined #ltsp