From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Wed May 4 01:46:37 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 21:46:37 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> Message-ID: Hello, Hope everyone is doing well! So been side-tracked a bit dealing with other technology issues in our new building (neither the server room nor the computer lab had any cooling system! That could have been very bad!) but I'm back to thinking about the new LTSP server. Thanks to everyone's feedback pretty well all aspects of the server are clear except just needing to decide on the motherboard. The I.T. shop we deal with recommended 3 motherboards to choose from. I've included a link to newegg.com for each item for the specifications. Cost-wise they're all revolving around each other so it's not a determining factor. 1) ASUS P6X58D-E http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131641 2) ASUS P6T WS PRO http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131357 3) Intel BOXDX58SO2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121470 Any preference / feedback? Other than that it's nearly all set! Thanks very much! Joseph From johno at islandwood.org Wed May 4 14:31:07 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 07:31:07 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com><4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com><4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com><4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> I myself have never been inclined to use a non-server board for anything other than a workstation. This system will be in the background however it will be a workhorse needing to be alive at any and all times around the clock. It does not have to be a powerful processor, just solid. The case should have removable cooling fans and dual power supplies each attached to a separate ups. Just my preference. a few hundred dollars can save thousands later. John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Bishay Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 6:47 PM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server Hello, Hope everyone is doing well! So been side-tracked a bit dealing with other technology issues in our new building (neither the server room nor the computer lab had any cooling system! That could have been very bad!) but I'm back to thinking about the new LTSP server. Thanks to everyone's feedback pretty well all aspects of the server are clear except just needing to decide on the motherboard. The I.T. shop we deal with recommended 3 motherboards to choose from. I've included a link to newegg.com for each item for the specifications. Cost-wise they're all revolving around each other so it's not a determining factor. 1) ASUS P6X58D-E http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131641 2) ASUS P6T WS PRO http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131357 3) Intel BOXDX58SO2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121470 Any preference / feedback? Other than that it's nearly all set! Thanks very much! Joseph _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From news at siddall.name Wed May 4 15:51:45 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 11:51:45 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com><4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com><4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com><4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> On 05/04/2011 10:31 AM, John Oligario wrote: > I myself have never been inclined to use a non-server board for anything > other than a workstation. This system will be in the background however > it will be a workhorse needing to be alive at any and all times around > the clock. It does not have to be a powerful processor, just solid. The > case should have removable cooling fans and dual power supplies each > attached to a separate ups. > Just my preference. a few hundred dollars can save thousands later. Agreed with John, you want a solid machine, and to some extent the more you spend the better your uptime will be. Just keep in mind though that using server-grade hardware will not make things bullet proof. ECC RAM does not guarantee your memory won't be corrupted, and almost every component is a single point of failure (RAM, CPU, motherboard etc.). You really need to have a standby server if you don't want an extended outage at some point in your life. If you are using server grade hardware now you probably looking at thousands more dollars than desktop grade. From johno at islandwood.org Wed May 4 16:26:52 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 09:26:52 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] after booting flashing terminal server client Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303688653@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Hello all, Strange happenings, now I have some systems constantly trying to setup the terminal server client. After about one to two minutes it finally settles down and then can logon. Ubuntu 10.04 with tftpboot, ltsp, dhcp server is windows 2003 server Cisco 7940 boots off same tftp server obtaining an ip. Any ideas why the screen may be doing this? John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 15:51:32 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 11:51:32 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> Message-ID: Hello John and Jeff. I do certainly agree that there is a difference between server hardware and desktop hardware, but with that difference comes a substantial price increase. I am on a very limited budget of around $1400 Canadian for the server and with the different components going into it, it is unlikely I could afford any server-level hardware. I am reassured by the fact that our previous LTSP "server" was a souped-up desktop that lasted 8 years of non-stop work and it's from the same shop. The factors such as component redundancy (power supplies, NICs, drives, CPUs, drives, etc.) would push the cost WAY above what I can get. I will be having another LTSP server that I am syncing /home to so theoretically if something goes down I do have a spare (it won't fail over automatically but that's not an issue). Hence why I'm looking to choose from between those motherboards. At least one of the boards does support ECC memory so that's "server-ish!" Thanks! Joseph On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/04/2011 10:31 AM, John Oligario wrote: >> I myself have never been inclined to use a non-server board for anything >> other than a workstation. This system will be in the background however >> it will be a workhorse needing to be alive at any and all times around >> the clock. It does not have to be a powerful processor, just solid. The >> case should have removable cooling fans and dual power supplies each >> attached to a separate ups. >> Just my preference. a few hundred dollars can save thousands later. > > Agreed with John, you want a solid machine, and to some extent the more > you spend the better your uptime will be. ?Just keep in mind though that > using server-grade hardware will not make things bullet proof. ?ECC RAM > does not guarantee your memory won't be corrupted, and almost every > component is a single point of failure (RAM, CPU, motherboard etc.). > You really need to have a standby server if you don't want an extended > outage at some point in your life. ?If you are using server grade > hardware now you probably looking at thousands more dollars than desktop > grade. > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From cfiaime at cfiaime.com Thu May 5 16:17:53 2011 From: cfiaime at cfiaime.com (Jeffrey Williams) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 10:17:53 -0600 Subject: [K12OSN] new LTSP installation - Fedora 14 Message-ID: <1304612273.4dc2cdb175a45@webmail.no-ip.com> Greetings, I've just finished installing K12LTSP on a Dell Poweredge 6650 server with a SCSI raid 5 array (a hand-me-down from corporate) for a new Web Design program at a private school. My thoughts about using LTSP rather than a bunch of desktops is the software we will be running won't drive the computer to its knees, and the DevonIT TC-2C thin clients are dirt reliable. The two biggest helps in getting this started were: http://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/InstallGuide http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652896 I had to install a bunch of packages for development tools and system administration because the initial install was from the desktop live CD. The server does not have a DVD drive, nor does BIOS allow for a USB boot. The other major pain was SELINUX and the internal firewall which blocked nfs mounts. The system is now running, everything seems to be booting properly, and I am actually using a thin client to type this report. Many thanks to everyone who has supplied documentation, input, RPMs, and the like to make this happen. I'll let you know how this pans out for the Web Design program, if the server has enough horsepower to make this work. Jeff Williams Communications Technology Department - Denver Academy of Court Reporting From julius at turtle.com Thu May 5 16:27:05 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:27:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> Message-ID: <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external SATA drives. YMMV. Julius > Hello John and Jeff. > > I do certainly agree that there is a difference between server > hardware and desktop hardware, but with that difference comes a > substantial price increase. I am on a very limited budget of around > $1400 Canadian for the server and with the different components going > into it, it is unlikely I could afford any server-level hardware. > > I am reassured by the fact that our previous LTSP "server" was a > souped-up desktop that lasted 8 years of non-stop work and it's from > the same shop. > > The factors such as component redundancy (power supplies, NICs, > drives, CPUs, drives, etc.) would push the cost WAY above what I can > get. I will be having another LTSP server that I am syncing /home to > so theoretically if something goes down I do have a spare (it won't > fail over automatically but that's not an issue). > > Hence why I'm looking to choose from between those motherboards. At > least one of the boards does support ECC memory so that's > "server-ish!" > > Thanks! > Joseph > > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> On 05/04/2011 10:31 AM, John Oligario wrote: >>> I myself have never been inclined to use a non-server board for >>> anything >>> other than a workstation. This system will be in the background however >>> it will be a workhorse needing to be alive at any and all times around >>> the clock. It does not have to be a powerful processor, just solid. The >>> case should have removable cooling fans and dual power supplies each >>> attached to a separate ups. >>> Just my preference. a few hundred dollars can save thousands later. >> >> Agreed with John, you want a solid machine, and to some extent the more >> you spend the better your uptime will be. ?Just keep in mind though that >> using server-grade hardware will not make things bullet proof. ?ECC RAM >> does not guarantee your memory won't be corrupted, and almost every >> component is a single point of failure (RAM, CPU, motherboard etc.). >> You really need to have a standby server if you don't want an extended >> outage at some point in your life. ?If you are using server grade >> hardware now you probably looking at thousands more dollars than desktop >> grade. >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see >> > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 16:40:33 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:40:33 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Message-ID: Hello Julius, On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and > I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR Actually that IS our server right now. Exact same machine. Has 2 GB ram, 2 xeon processors giving 4 core threads, and 65 GB Raid 1 SCSI drives. It currently drives 14 machines and I haven't had an issue. However, the issue is (from what I understand) that a machine like that can't support the new server that needs to drive 65 thin clients. And drive them well (as any hiccups always come back to "well it must be because this is Linux and not Windows) so I want to avoid any issues. Thanks, Joseph > There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of > those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external > SATA drives. YMMV. > > Julius From julius at turtle.com Thu May 5 16:57:10 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:57:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Message-ID: <55534.216.216.171.235.1304614630.squirrel@216.216.171.235> You have a problem. I'm running 40 terminals on a server with 4 AMD 64bit processors, 4 cores each with 32GB memory. Should have gone with more processors and more memory. The response time is usually just fine, but no development is don on this server. 65 terminals need a lot of memory an a lot of bandwidth. You may want to look into DRBL, not that I had any luck with Zotac boxes ;-) Julius > Hello Julius, > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz > wrote: >> Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) >> and >> I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: >> http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR > > Actually that IS our server right now. Exact same machine. Has 2 GB > ram, 2 xeon processors giving 4 core threads, and 65 GB Raid 1 SCSI > drives. It currently drives 14 machines and I haven't had an issue. > > However, the issue is (from what I understand) that a machine like > that can't support the new server that needs to drive 65 thin clients. > And drive them well (as any hiccups always come back to "well it must > be because this is Linux and not Windows) so I want to avoid any > issues. > > Thanks, > Joseph > >> There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of >> those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external >> SATA drives. YMMV. >> >> Julius > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 17:33:56 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 13:33:56 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? Message-ID: Hello everyone, We are in the process of building a new elementary school, and one of the education consultants who specializes in elementary schools has told us that "modern" elementary schools do not have a need for a computer lab. In fact, we were told that our planned computer lab is detrimental for the school's image and reputation as it is "old fashion". To be honest I was very shocked. While both of us agree that there should be some computers in each of the classrooms, not having a dedicated computer lab to me is surprising. In Ontario there is no specific curriculum for computers in elementary school but I know that in my elementary school we did have a lab and used it extensively! I wanted feedback from those of you in education as to what you think. This does affect our planning and budget greatly so I appreciate your feedback. Thank you Joseph From johno at islandwood.org Thu May 5 17:36:22 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:36:22 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368878E@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Perhaps your consultant wants you to think along his lines and go with less expensive say of doing things. Where I am we have a few computer labs even though most of the teaching is outdoors. John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Bishay Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 10:34 AM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? Hello everyone, We are in the process of building a new elementary school, and one of the education consultants who specializes in elementary schools has told us that "modern" elementary schools do not have a need for a computer lab. In fact, we were told that our planned computer lab is detrimental for the school's image and reputation as it is "old fashion". To be honest I was very shocked. While both of us agree that there should be some computers in each of the classrooms, not having a dedicated computer lab to me is surprising. In Ontario there is no specific curriculum for computers in elementary school but I know that in my elementary school we did have a lab and used it extensively! I wanted feedback from those of you in education as to what you think. This does affect our planning and budget greatly so I appreciate your feedback. Thank you Joseph _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From news at siddall.name Thu May 5 17:53:28 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 13:53:28 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Message-ID: <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> On 05/05/2011 12:27 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and > I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR > > There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of > those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external > SATA drives. YMMV. I would say there is a lot of cheap hardware out there but I would argue it is not good. That $199 server has CPUs that perform about the same as an Atom 330 so using that is like deploying an LTSP server on a netbook! A decent _new_ desktop system has more than 10X the performance, more than 10X the storage and likely 4X the RAM of that server. Getting a server that can keep up with that performance will cost $$$ thousands. From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 5 18:19:49 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 13:19:49 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC2EA45.4070907@gmail.com> On 5/5/2011 12:53 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > A decent _new_ desktop system has more than 10X the performance, more > than 10X the storage and likely 4X the RAM of that server. Getting a > server that can keep up with that performance will cost $$$ thousands. An ltsp server is sort-of a special case where you need the CPU performance because you are running the client desktops and apps (unless you have local apps) and you also need disk reliability. I think there is a case for using an older, slower but sever-class (dual power supplies, hardware raid, etc.) machine as an NFS and authentication server with one or more fast desktop machines (lots of RAM but otherwise cheap) acting as the ltsp servers - and being mostly interchangeable or even disposable. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 18:30:46 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 14:30:46 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC2EA45.4070907@gmail.com> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> <4DC2EA45.4070907@gmail.com> Message-ID: Les, On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> An ltsp server is sort-of a special case where you need the CPU performance > because you are running the client desktops and apps (unless you have local > apps) and you also need disk reliability. ?I think there is a case for using > an older, slower but sever-class (dual power supplies, hardware raid, etc.) > machine as an NFS and authentication server with one or more fast desktop > machines (lots of RAM but otherwise cheap) acting as the ltsp servers - and > being mostly interchangeable or even disposable. Is there a HOWTO or guide for how to set up such a configuration? I think that would help utilize some of the existing hardware we have now as well as reduce the cost of the purchased server. I also wanted to ask if there are any drawbacks or concerns with such a deployment? Thank you Joseph From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 5 18:53:54 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 13:53:54 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> <4DC2EA45.4070907@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC2F242.3090309@gmail.com> On 5/5/2011 1:30 PM, Joseph Bishay wrote: > Les, > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> An ltsp server is sort-of a special case where you need the CPU performance >> because you are running the client desktops and apps (unless you have local >> apps) and you also need disk reliability. I think there is a case for using >> an older, slower but sever-class (dual power supplies, hardware raid, etc.) >> machine as an NFS and authentication server with one or more fast desktop >> machines (lots of RAM but otherwise cheap) acting as the ltsp servers - and >> being mostly interchangeable or even disposable. > > Is there a HOWTO or guide for how to set up such a configuration? I > think that would help utilize some of the existing hardware we have > now as well as reduce the cost of the purchased server. I also wanted > to ask if there are any drawbacks or concerns with such a deployment? I thought someone had done it long ago with k12ltsp, but I haven't kept up with newer versions and don't have anything installed myself now. The only tricky part should be arranging load balancing/failover for the dhcp and boot service if you have more than one ltsp server. If you don't care about failover, you could just feed separate sets of clients from the 2nd NIC of each ltsp server. You might be able to make a home/auth server out of ClearOS without too much trouble since it uses LDAP natively and it would be easy to add email and web services (etc.) managed with its web interface. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From julius at turtle.com Thu May 5 19:17:30 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 15:17:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC2E418.5020001@siddall.name> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 May 2011, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/05/2011 12:27 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > > Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and > > I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: > > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR > > > > There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of > > those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external > > SATA drives. YMMV. > > I would say there is a lot of cheap hardware out there but I would argue > it is not good. > > That $199 server has CPUs that perform about the same as an Atom 330 so > using that is like deploying an LTSP server on a netbook! > > A decent _new_ desktop system has more than 10X the performance, more > than 10X the storage and likely 4X the RAM of that server. Getting a > server that can keep up with that performance will cost $$$ thousands. I'd say you are overly optimistic on the capabilities of Atom processors. The $199.00 server has 2 3.2GHz Xeons and 4GB ram. It also has excellent HP smartArray controller and 6 SCSI drives and 2 1GB server class NICs. I can see how you can get 10 times the performance in a desktop system, but it seems to run into multiple thousands of dollars, without ECC memory, without redundant power supplies, without good array controllers, without SCSI drives ... I'd look for a refurb 4 processor server, either Xeon or AMD 64bit, put 12GB ECC memory in it, add SATA controller and drives for big slower storage and let her rip. Desktop systems are just that, desktop. Servers behave better under load and tend to last better. My $0.02 Julius From johno at islandwood.org Thu May 5 19:40:55 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:40:55 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] local machine logon after pxe boot Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036887E1@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Hello all, I have systems which are pxe booting. What I want to be able to do is access the local version of linux after system boot to pxe. By pressing ctrl-alt-f1 you can get to a terminal login screen on tty1. What I do not know is the login name and password, anyone ever try to run mplayer or the like remotely this way while pxe booting? John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From news at siddall.name Thu May 5 19:58:51 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 15:58:51 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC3017B.6070007@siddall.name> On 05/05/2011 03:17 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > On Thu, 5 May 2011, Jeff Siddall wrote: > >> On 05/05/2011 12:27 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: >>> Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and >>> I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: >>> http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR >>> >>> There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of >>> those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external >>> SATA drives. YMMV. >> >> I would say there is a lot of cheap hardware out there but I would argue >> it is not good. >> >> That $199 server has CPUs that perform about the same as an Atom 330 so >> using that is like deploying an LTSP server on a netbook! >> >> A decent _new_ desktop system has more than 10X the performance, more >> than 10X the storage and likely 4X the RAM of that server. Getting a >> server that can keep up with that performance will cost $$$ thousands. > > I'd say you are overly optimistic on the capabilities of Atom processors. Admittedly that was a bit of an exaggeration, but not much. An Atom 330 is 80% as fast as a Xeon 3.2 according to PassMark. It wouldn't take much to grind both of those CPUs to a halt. > The $199.00 server has 2 3.2GHz Xeons and 4GB ram. It also has excellent > HP smartArray controller and 6 SCSI drives and 2 1GB server class NICs. I > can see how you can get 10 times the performance in a desktop system, but > it seems to run into multiple thousands of dollars, without ECC memory, > without redundant power supplies, without good array controllers, without > SCSI drives ... The disk subsystem is by far the best thing about this server. For random IO it is hard to beat a big array of high RPM drives. The other replies about using a machine like this as a file server are worth considering, although ultimately NFS will become the bottleneck there. > I'd look for a refurb 4 processor server, either Xeon or AMD 64bit, put > 12GB ECC memory in it, add SATA controller and drives for big slower > storage and let her rip. Desktop systems are just that, desktop. Servers > behave better under load and tend to last better. My $0.02 Sure, a server with 12 GB ECC RAM and 4 processors much newer than the 7 year old Xeons would be great. My point was simply that a modern desktop could support oodles more clients than this server, and may not be significantly less reliable. From robark at gmail.com Thu May 5 20:04:37 2011 From: robark at gmail.com (Robert Arkiletian) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 13:04:37 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Joseph Bishay wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We are in the process of building a new elementary school, and one of > the education consultants who specializes in elementary schools has > told us that "modern" elementary schools do not have a need for a > computer lab. ?In fact, we were told that our planned computer lab is > detrimental for the school's image and reputation as it is "old > fashion". > > To be honest I was very shocked. ?While both of us agree that there > should be some computers in each of the classrooms, not having a > dedicated computer lab to me is surprising. ?In Ontario there is no > specific curriculum for computers in elementary school but I know that > in my elementary school we did have a lab and used it extensively! > > I wanted feedback from those of you in education as to what you think. > ?This does affect our planning and budget greatly so I appreciate your > feedback. > Yes this seems to be the way people at the top are thinking these days. The trend is towards having wireless and a personal device per student, be it laptops or otherwise. -- Robert Arkiletian Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 20:13:08 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 16:13:08 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368878E@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368878E@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: Hello, On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:36 PM, John Oligario wrote: > Perhaps your consultant wants you to think along his lines and go with > less expensive say of doing things. Where I am we have a few computer > labs even though most of the teaching is outdoors. I don't think that it will result in it being less expensive -- in fact I know it doesn't have anything to do with the budget but all about appearance. Further, it may actually cost us more as having one computer lab with 20 machines is cheaper than trying to spread 5 or 6 computers around 10 classrooms. Thanks for your feedback. Joseph From joseph.bishay at gmail.com Thu May 5 20:14:54 2011 From: joseph.bishay at gmail.com (Joseph Bishay) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 16:14:54 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: > Yes this seems to be the way people at the top are thinking these > days. The trend is towards having wireless and a personal device per > student, be it laptops or otherwise. If that is what they are thinking that's going to have major repercussions on us as you can't use LTSP over wireless and we can't afford to purchase, nor charge the students for some sort of personal device. That is interesting that you also noticed this trend. Thanks for that. Joseph From DLWillson at TheGeek.NU Thu May 5 20:26:40 2011 From: DLWillson at TheGeek.NU (David L. Willson) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 14:26:40 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > Yes this seems to be the way people at the top are thinking these > > days. The trend is towards having wireless and a personal device > > per > > student, be it laptops or otherwise. > > If that is what they are thinking that's going to have major > repercussions on us as you can't use LTSP over wireless and we can't > afford to purchase, nor charge the students for some sort of personal > device. My favorite school, RMSEL in Denver, has been using wireless netbooks with some success. Instead of building another computer lab, they bought a locking cart and filled it with power strips and netbooks. The kids take the net-books out and just use them. If they need to save something, they email it using their account on the school's Zimbra server. They can access the LTSP environment from the netbook using VNC if they want to get to "their normal desktop". From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 5 20:39:18 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 15:39:18 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC30AF6.7050704@gmail.com> On 5/5/2011 3:14 PM, Joseph Bishay wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: >> Yes this seems to be the way people at the top are thinking these >> days. The trend is towards having wireless and a personal device per >> student, be it laptops or otherwise. > > If that is what they are thinking that's going to have major > repercussions on us as you can't use LTSP over wireless and we can't > afford to purchase, nor charge the students for some sort of personal > device. I think an interesting variation would be a way to boot a laptop into the NX client (locally, doesn't matter much how or what OS underneath), and then log into a freenx desktop session that would be essentially the same as a thin client but with good remote/wireless performance at least for everything short of streaming video. You could probably do this from a live-cd so as not to have per-machine installs. Or if the client already has a working OS, just install NX. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From news at siddall.name Thu May 5 20:47:01 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 16:47:01 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC30CC5.3010704@siddall.name> On 05/05/2011 03:17 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > HP smartArray controller and 6 SCSI drives and 2 1GB server class NICs. I > can see how you can get 10 times the performance in a desktop system, but > it seems to run into multiple thousands of dollars, without ECC memory, > without redundant power supplies, without good array controllers, without > SCSI drives ... An Intel Core i7 2600 is about 10X the speed of a Xeon 3.2 and is $310 12 GB Corsair DDR3 is $140 An OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB SSD is $220 Definitely not multiple thousands of dollars but still 10X the CPU performance, 3X the RAM, and a much faster disk. Want more reliability and double the disk read throughput? Add a redundant disk with software RAID1. That will easily outperform the 6 disk SCSI3 array. Want 10X the networking performance? Add a 10 GBaseT NIC for about $500. Agreed about no ECC and no redundant power but honestly those have never been big issues for me. After all, LTSP is all about serving desktops so desktop reliability doesn't seem so out of line. From reb at taco.com Thu May 5 23:13:24 2011 From: reb at taco.com (Phydeaux) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 19:13:24 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> References: <4DAC5BEE.60700@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAD13ED.9060900@cmosnetworks.com> <4DAEF519.7090004@deltacfax.com> <4DAF26C7.7010508@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF0933130368863A@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC17611.4000404@siddall.name> <42147.216.216.171.235.1304612825.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Message-ID: <5e7fd71e88dc87cbcae05e8b3eca71ee.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> > Joe, you are mistaken. I'm about to build some fax servers (don't ask) and > I'm looking at $199.00 servers. For example: > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=DL380-XEON3200X2-4R&cat=SVR > > There's a lot of good cheap hardware out there. If I were to make one of > those baies into an LTSP server, I'd add a SATA controller and external > SATA drives. YMMV. I'd agree. Our school has 15 workstations. The server has two SATA drives (one for backup) 6gb of RAM and a four core AMD CPU (I think we get far better bang for our buck with AMD). The whole server machine cost about $350. The kids bang on it with OpenOffice and Firefox all day long and I have never heard a complaint about performance. reb From julius at turtle.com Thu May 5 23:25:28 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 19:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC30CC5.3010704@siddall.name> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 May 2011, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/05/2011 03:17 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > > HP smartArray controller and 6 SCSI drives and 2 1GB server class NICs. I > > can see how you can get 10 times the performance in a desktop system, but > > it seems to run into multiple thousands of dollars, without ECC memory, > > without redundant power supplies, without good array controllers, without > > SCSI drives ... > > An Intel Core i7 2600 is about 10X the speed of a Xeon 3.2 and is $310 > 12 GB Corsair DDR3 is $140 > An OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB SSD is $220 > > Definitely not multiple thousands of dollars but still 10X the CPU > performance, 3X the RAM, and a much faster disk. > > Want more reliability and double the disk read throughput? Add a > redundant disk with software RAID1. That will easily outperform the 6 > disk SCSI3 array. > > Want 10X the networking performance? Add a 10 GBaseT NIC for about $500. > > Agreed about no ECC and no redundant power but honestly those have never > been big issues for me. After all, LTSP is all about serving desktops > so desktop reliability doesn't seem so out of line. > Jeff, your point is well taken, but as I said, YMMV. It's been my experience that servers do a better job serving. ECC memory makes a huge difference - I never had a server sudden stop due to a transient memory error, it did happen to many desktop systems. I have yet to experience a bad failure of SCSI disk array. Software RAID? Not that good. And honestly, my Atom based netbook is really not a very good server, despite 8GB memory. Oh, I forgot - the 10GB switches arte not yet commodities. julius From burke at thealmquists.net Thu May 5 23:36:01 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 18:36:01 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] new LTSP installation - Fedora 14 In-Reply-To: <1304612273.4dc2cdb175a45@webmail.no-ip.com> References: <1304612273.4dc2cdb175a45@webmail.no-ip.com> Message-ID: On May 5, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Jeffrey Williams wrote: > Greetings, > > I've just finished installing K12LTSP on a Dell Poweredge 6650 server with a SCSI raid 5 array (a hand-me-down from corporate) for a new Web Design program at a private school. My thoughts about using LTSP rather than a bunch of desktops is the software we will be running won't drive the computer to its knees, and the DevonIT TC-2C thin clients are dirt reliable. > > The two biggest helps in getting this started were: > http://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/InstallGuide > http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652896 > > I had to install a bunch of packages for development tools and system administration because the initial install was from the desktop live CD. The server does not have a DVD drive, nor does BIOS allow for a USB boot. > > The other major pain was SELINUX and the internal firewall which blocked nfs mounts. > > The system is now running, everything seems to be booting properly, and I am actually using a thin client to type this report. > > Many thanks to everyone who has supplied documentation, input, RPMs, and the like to make this happen. I'll let you know how this pans out for the Web Design program, if the server has enough horsepower to make this work. > Glad to hear you were successful. Any feedback on the wiki documentation is appreciated. We are always looking to make it more understandable and through. > Jeff Williams > Communications Technology Department - Denver Academy of Court Reporting > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From burke at thealmquists.net Thu May 5 23:53:51 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 18:53:51 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73B8712A-7AB4-4335-AB20-6256BFBE1966@thealmquists.net> On May 5, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Joseph Bishay wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We are in the process of building a new elementary school, and one of > the education consultants who specializes in elementary schools has > told us that "modern" elementary schools do not have a need for a > computer lab. In fact, we were told that our planned computer lab is > detrimental for the school's image and reputation as it is "old > fashion". > > To be honest I was very shocked. While both of us agree that there > should be some computers in each of the classrooms, not having a > dedicated computer lab to me is surprising. In Ontario there is no > specific curriculum for computers in elementary school but I know that > in my elementary school we did have a lab and used it extensively! > > I wanted feedback from those of you in education as to what you think. > This does affect our planning and budget greatly so I appreciate your > feedback. Scattering a couple PCs in each room is great, but sometimes you need a 1 to 1 ratio achieved by a computer lab or a cart of laptops that can be checked out. One is not a substitute for the other, you really need a mix of both. In my experience, labs are cheeps than portable carts because desktops are cheeper to buy, less likely to break, easier to repair, and you reduce the amount of electrical and network wiring you need to run to each classroom. The advantage of portable carts is they are space efficient (no separate lab room), and they are more convenient than shuttling students to and from the lab. > > Thank you > Joseph > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From brcisna at eazylivin.net Fri May 6 02:49:44 2011 From: brcisna at eazylivin.net (Barry R Cisna) Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 21:49:44 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? Message-ID: <1304650184.4763.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Joseph, It's always good to get a second opinion. That being "the consultant". That being said.If you are the ONE doing the leg work in the grand scheme of things, I would look at it,as "it is my way or the highway". You have a good idea of what your school's needs are in regards to student's to pc ratio etc. Laptops on multiple carts stuffed in various classrooms are great, providing, you have one dedicated grunt maintaining these laptops. The voice of experience talking here. Me being the grunt!..:( In the long haul,if teachers,admins,and You want the students to have reliable internet access with a plethora of application sets,available, the K12ltsp is still 'new school' and most reliable bottom line. I would bet money your 'consultant' has never heard of k12ltsp solution for one thing. Just my 2 cents. Take Care, Barry From microman at cmosnetworks.com Fri May 6 06:10:48 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 02:10:48 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: <1304650184.4763.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1304650184.4763.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4DC390E8.5010901@cmosnetworks.com> Barry R Cisna wrote: > I would bet money your 'consultant' has never heard of k12ltsp solution for one thing. > Just my 2 cents. > It's also been my experience that a lot of these "consultants" are Microsoft-certified. If that's true in this case, then I'd recommend taking this "no computer lab necessary" recommendation with a grain of salt...maybe two grains. --TP From ollenotna2000 at yahoo.it Fri May 6 10:46:30 2011 From: ollenotna2000 at yahoo.it (ollenotna2000) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 12:46:30 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> Il 05/05/2011 19:33, Joseph Bishay ha scritto: > Hello everyone, > > We are in the process of building a new elementary school, and one of > the education consultants who specializes in elementary schools has > told us that "modern" elementary schools do not have a need for a > computer lab. In fact, we were told that our planned computer lab is > detrimental for the school's image and reputation as it is "old > fashion". > > To be honest I was very shocked. While both of us agree that there > should be some computers in each of the classrooms, not having a > dedicated computer lab to me is surprising. In Ontario there is no > specific curriculum for computers in elementary school but I know that > in my elementary school we did have a lab and used it extensively! > > I wanted feedback from those of you in education as to what you think. > This does affect our planning and budget greatly so I appreciate your > feedback. > I'm kind of a lurker in this list, but accept my 2 cents about the topic. Here in Italy, as far as ICT diffusion in schools is concerned, we are living prehistoric times compared to you. For the average schools a decent computer lab is a dream. Yet government usually prefers to run after excellence than diffusion, so only a few number of schools, at every level, can develop innovative solutions. And in such a situation "fashion" and "economical interests" play a big role. Thus consider what I say in this perspective: I'm talking of "exceptional" and not of "normal" schools. Well, in the last years the trend is definitely to give up with computer labs and to work in a 1-1 scheme: each student with his own computer, possibly a netbook in a wifi environment. The idea is that if there is a whiteboard in each classroom and each student has a (always connected) netbook, there's no need for a computer-lab as all ict-work is done in the classroom by any teacher in any subject. The first experiences were done with OLPCs, but now the choice are netbooks. In some situations each student is given a personal netbook for the whole year, that he can take home and let him connect to the school intranet. Of course this utopic point of view may sound ridicolous in our national situation, and we must not forget the fact that this is getting a very big business here in italy, but there could be a sense in all this. Antonello Facchetti From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Fri May 6 14:37:30 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 10:37:30 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations Message-ID: After 8 years, we are looking to upgrade/replace a lot of our older Epia Eden 533's. This is being driven by the need for better local apps and local capabilities, which implies (at least to me) fat clients. I've seen quite a bit of discussion about using Atom-based systems for thin clients on the list. However, I have no idea what the current thinking is with respect to a solution that will be viable for at least another 3-5. Local needs are for browsing (easy), local sound/music applications, streaming video (flash and other formats). We have a centralized ldap authentication and NFS file servers. I've looked at DRBL but still feel that the capabilities of LTSP6 are very similar now to DRBL with fat client options. Any advice on what thin clients/fat clients with very small form factors (attach to the back of LCD monitors is ideal) is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Dave Hopkins Newark Charter School Newark Delaware p.s good to see that the list is still active although I haven't been posting to it much in the last year or so. From steven at sjdsoft.hk Fri May 6 14:49:10 2011 From: steven at sjdsoft.hk (Steven James Drinnan) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 22:49:10 +0800 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations Message-ID: Try Zotac David Hopkins wrote: >After 8 years, we are looking to upgrade/replace a lot of our older >Epia Eden 533's. This is being driven by the need for better local >apps and local capabilities, which implies (at least to me) fat >clients. I've seen quite a bit of discussion about using Atom-based >systems for thin clients on the list. However, I have no idea what the >current thinking is with respect to a solution that will be viable for >at least another 3-5. > >Local needs are for browsing (easy), local sound/music applications, >streaming video (flash and other formats). We have a centralized ldap >authentication and NFS file servers. I've looked at DRBL but still >feel that the capabilities of LTSP6 are very similar now to DRBL with >fat client options. > >Any advice on what thin clients/fat clients with very small form >factors (attach to the back of LCD monitors is ideal) is greatly >appreciated. > >Sincerely, >Dave Hopkins >Newark Charter School >Newark Delaware > >p.s good to see that the list is still active although I haven't been >posting to it much in the last year or so. > >_______________________________________________ >K12OSN mailing list >K12OSN at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >For more info see From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Fri May 6 15:10:46 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 11:10:46 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just want to correct a typo: LTSP 5 ... not 6. I was thinking CentOS 6 :( On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:37 AM, David Hopkins wrote: > After 8 years, we are looking to upgrade/replace a lot of our older > Epia Eden 533's. ?This is being driven by the need for better local > apps and local capabilities, which implies (at least to me) fat > clients. ?I've seen quite a bit of discussion about using Atom-based > systems for thin clients on the list. However, I have no idea what the > current thinking is with respect to a solution that will be viable for > at least another 3-5. > > Local needs are for browsing (easy), local sound/music applications, > streaming video (flash and other formats). ?We have a centralized ldap > authentication and NFS file servers. ?I've looked at DRBL but still > feel that the capabilities of LTSP6 are very similar now to DRBL with > fat client options. > > Any advice on what thin clients/fat clients with very small form > factors (attach to the back of LCD monitors is ideal) is greatly > appreciated. > > Sincerely, > Dave Hopkins > Newark Charter School > Newark Delaware > > p.s good to see that the list is still active although I haven't been > posting to it much in the last year or so. > From news at siddall.name Fri May 6 15:36:04 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:36:04 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC41564.8010201@siddall.name> On 05/05/2011 07:25 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > Jeff, your point is well taken, but as I said, YMMV. It's been my > experience that servers do a better job serving. ECC memory makes a huge > difference - I never had a server sudden stop due to a transient memory > error, it did happen to many desktop systems. I have yet to experience a > bad failure of SCSI disk array. Software RAID? Not that good. And > honestly, my Atom based netbook is really not a very good server, despite > 8GB memory. You bring up an interesting point: desktop user system versus headless server system. I too have found that desktop workstations frequently hang or otherwise get into a bad state requiring a hard boot. Above you attribute this to ECC RAM/desktop hardware, but my experience is that those two things are unrelated. I have a number of headless "desktop" servers and _all of them_ consistently run forever. By that I mean that I end up rebooting them to install a kernel or replace hardware or something before they ever stop on their own. In the past 9 years I have been running desktop "servers" I can count on one hand the number of times a machine just died inexplicably, and even those could not be confirmed as a memory corruption issue. Likewise, I have never had a power supply or system/CPU fan fail in that time either. My latest LTSP "desktop" server, now almost 2 years old, has _never_ had even one second of unplanned downtime. And it has at least a dozen clients connected all the time. So I can't explain why headless systems work so much better, except that it is probably related to flaky X drivers or something. Anyone else have similar experience? > Oh, I forgot - the 10GB switches arte not yet commodities. Not exactly commodity, but for a few thousand $$$ you can get a switch that supports 10GBaseT so it's not that far out of reach any more. Jeff From news at siddall.name Fri May 6 15:55:48 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:55:48 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> On 05/06/2011 10:49 AM, Steven James Drinnan wrote: > Try > > Zotac If you are OK with Atom based stuff consider the Intel MiniITX lineup (D945GSEJT, D410PT, D510MO etc.). Great bang for the buck and no proprietary drivers, though 3D performance is not spectacular. Jeff From lesmikesell at gmail.com Fri May 6 16:01:11 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:01:11 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC41564.8010201@siddall.name> References: <4DC41564.8010201@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC41B47.9070607@gmail.com> On 5/6/2011 10:36 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > So I can't explain why headless systems work so much better, except that > it is probably related to flaky X drivers or something. Anyone else > have similar experience? Most conclusions like this are probably more related to luck and small sample size than anything else, but keeping a system powered on all the time might help, along with a location with good cooling and stable power. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From rasher at paragould.k12.ar.us Fri May 6 16:02:17 2011 From: rasher at paragould.k12.ar.us (Rob Asher) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:17 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC3D539.0172.0037.0@paragould.k12.ar.us> Has anyone heard anything about this? http://www.raspberrypi.org/ Looks like it would be a good fit as a thin client at some point in the future. Rob ---------------- Rob Asher Network Systems Technician Paragould School District 870-236-7744 x169 >>> Jeff Siddall 05/06/11 10:55 AM >>> On 05/06/2011 10:49 AM, Steven James Drinnan wrote: > Try > > Zotac If you are OK with Atom based stuff consider the Intel MiniITX lineup (D945GSEJT, D410PT, D510MO etc.). Great bang for the buck and no proprietary drivers, though 3D performance is not spectacular. Jeff _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see ---------- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by the Paragould School District MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ---------- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by the Paragould School District MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From johno at islandwood.org Fri May 6 16:05:22 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 09:05:22 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> One thing to be aware is to have an updated version of Linux. The d945gsejt does not have the proper drivers available on the Intel website. I went through this and created numerous problems in trying to make it work properly. John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Siddall Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 8:56 AM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations On 05/06/2011 10:49 AM, Steven James Drinnan wrote: > Try > > Zotac If you are OK with Atom based stuff consider the Intel MiniITX lineup (D945GSEJT, D410PT, D510MO etc.). Great bang for the buck and no proprietary drivers, though 3D performance is not spectacular. Jeff _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From microman at cmosnetworks.com Fri May 6 16:13:47 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 12:13:47 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server In-Reply-To: <4DC41B47.9070607@gmail.com> References: <4DC41564.8010201@siddall.name> <4DC41B47.9070607@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC41E3B.6020708@cmosnetworks.com> Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/6/2011 10:36 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> >> So I can't explain why headless systems work so much better, except that >> it is probably related to flaky X drivers or something. Anyone else >> have similar experience? > > Most conclusions like this are probably more related to luck and small > sample size than anything else, but keeping a system powered on all > the time might help, along with a location with good cooling and > stable power. > I think the last points in particular here--keeping it on all the time, good cooling, stable power--are the big points. Silicon is much happier under these conditions. :-) --TP From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Fri May 6 17:00:08 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 13:00:08 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC3D539.0172.0037.0@paragould.k12.ar.us> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <4DC3D539.0172.0037.0@paragould.k12.ar.us> Message-ID: I also noticed that product (mentioned on Slashdot). Unfortunately, if it is ever released, it will be 12-18 months (my best guess). It would be quite nice though at the price mentioned. Sincerely, Dave Hopkins On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Rob Asher wrote: > Has anyone heard anything about this? ?http://www.raspberrypi.org/ ? ?Looks like it would be a good fit as a thin client at some point in the future. > > Rob > > > > > ---------------- > Rob Asher > Network Systems Technician > Paragould School District > 870-236-7744?x169 > > > >>>> Jeff Siddall 05/06/11 10:55 AM >>> > On 05/06/2011 10:49 AM, Steven James Drinnan wrote: >> Try >> >> Zotac > > If you are OK with Atom based stuff consider the Intel MiniITX lineup > (D945GSEJT, D410PT, D510MO etc.). ?Great bang for the buck and no > proprietary drivers, though 3D performance is not spectacular. > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > ---------- > > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by the Paragould School District > MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. > > > > > ---------- > > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by the Paragould School District > MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From news at siddall.name Fri May 6 19:35:47 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 15:35:47 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> On 05/06/2011 12:05 PM, John Oligario wrote: > One thing to be aware is to have an updated version of Linux. The > d945gsejt does not have the proper drivers available on the Intel > website. I went through this and created numerous problems in trying to > make it work properly. I have deployed dozens of D945GSEJTs on Fedora 12+, never installed anything special, and never had a problem. What version are you using? Jeff From peter at scheie.homedns.org Sat May 7 01:22:31 2011 From: peter at scheie.homedns.org (Peter Scheie) Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 20:22:31 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> References: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> Message-ID: <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> ollenotna2000 wrote: > In some situations each student is given a personal netbook for the > whole year, that he can take home and let him connect to the school > intranet. Many people, those inside the schools and those outside, think this idea sounds cools & high tech. But it is a support nightmare. I've lost track of the number of schools who got a grant to buy a bunch of laptops and three years later had to essentially abandon the program because the cost of supporting a 1:1 program with the students--keeping the machines working, keeping them from being messed up by the kids, dealing with them as parts inevitably break--quickly dwarf the initial acquisition costs. It is MUCH cheaper to build centralized login servers with LTSP servers & thin clients in all the classrooms, where the students get their own environment no matter which machine they login on. The analogy I give people is that giving students their own laptops is like saying "If we give each kid his own folding chair, then we don't have to put any in the classrooms, they can just carry the chairs from room to room." That's true but it mostly provides computing where they don't need it, e.g., the hallway. LTSP drives the cost of (access to) computing down so low that it's affordable to put a lab into every classroom. One laptop for each kid sounds & looks cool, but it is the most expensive way to provide access to computers for kids. Peter From reb at taco.com Sat May 7 02:52:42 2011 From: reb at taco.com (Phydeaux) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:42 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> References: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> Message-ID: <1dbda694a405a790e3927c8ba8dc942c.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> > It is MUCH cheaper to build centralized login servers with LTSP servers & thin > clients in all the classrooms, where the students get their own environment no > matter which machine they login on. I'd agree -- and without sounding like I'm piling on too much I'd like to add an additional few points that have not yet been made. In our K-8 school kids lose all sorts of stuff of their own. Giving them computers to move around with is just asking for trouble. We can't use wireless mice or keyboards because they would disappear or get mixed up. Wired mice and keyboards can't walk away by accident. Why then would we use a wireless laptop/netbook computer? They would be dropped or lost quite easily. The portability of these machines is lovely, but it is also expensive. The bang-for-your-buck sweet spot is definitely not with portable machines. If you don't want to take a lab approach, sprinkle machines in twos or fours around the school. Our school has a multi-age open classroom-like setting. With several sets of two or four machines throughout the building, and LTSP letting them log in from anywhere, the kids love the way things are set up. It sure beats worrying about losing or dropping machines, or worrying about floppy disks, USB sticks, batteries, or plugging in, etc. The machines are there and just plain work. When it comes down to it, that's what they really need. reb From robark at gmail.com Sat May 7 06:38:50 2011 From: robark at gmail.com (Robert Arkiletian) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 23:38:50 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> References: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> Message-ID: On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Peter Scheie wrote: > ollenotna2000 wrote: > >> In some situations each student is given a personal netbook for the whole >> year, that he can take home and let him connect to the school intranet. > > Many people, those inside the schools and those outside, think this idea > sounds cools & high tech. ?But it is a support nightmare. ?I've lost track > of the number of schools who got a grant to buy a bunch of laptops and three > years later had to essentially abandon the program because the cost of > supporting a 1:1 program with the students--keeping the machines working, > keeping them from being messed up by the kids, dealing with them as parts > inevitably break--quickly dwarf the initial acquisition costs. > > It is MUCH cheaper to build centralized login servers with LTSP servers & > thin clients in all the classrooms, where the students get their own > environment no matter which machine they login on. > > The analogy I give people is that giving students their own laptops is like > saying "If we give each kid his own folding chair, then we don't have to put > any in the classrooms, they can just carry the chairs from room to room." > ?That's true but it mostly provides computing where they don't need it, > e.g., the hallway. ?LTSP drives the cost of (access to) computing down so > low that it's affordable to put a lab into every classroom. ?One laptop for > each kid sounds & looks cool, but it is the most expensive way to provide > access to computers for kids. > Hi Peter, It's nice to see this thread revive this list. I'm going to play devil's advocate. Not that I really disagree with you but to point out why school districts are eager to shift paradigms and move to 1:1 mobile devices. Pros: All classrooms are connected to internet. (via wireless ap's) No more labs to purchase No more maintenance of labs (parts+labour) No network cable infrastructure upgrade costs No electric power infrastructure upgrade costs Lower electric utility bills for schools (students generally recharge devices at home) Per student mobile devices means schools can migrate towards ebooks ** no more heavy back packs full of textbooks for students to carry No more photocopying handouts ("eveyone download the handout from the webserver now") ** Students responsible for purchasing their own mobile device. (financial burden off district) **huge cost savings Cons: Wireless network infrastructure costs Higher network security requirements Virus, malware issues. Mobile devices break easily (shorter life than desktops) Students misuse mobile devices as gaming or texting platforms Learning from a screen is not as pleasant as learning from a book (my opinion) Mishmash variety of hardware and software (no standardization) Students responsible for purchasing their own mobile device. (financial burden on parents) If you think about applications and how the browser is THE new platform then you can provide most apps through SaaS (Software as a Service). OS agnostic as long as you have a browser. Whether or not this new high tech system will work, I'm not sure. I have my doubts too. But this is the light bulb idea that most higher ups in education are imagining. The problem is what do you do with students who can't afford a mobile device? Ownership is what creates motivation to look after the device's well being. Feel free to add more pros and cons or add your $0.02. This is a fun discussion. -- Robert Arkiletian Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada From microman at cmosnetworks.com Sat May 7 07:04:31 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 03:04:31 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> Message-ID: <4DC4EEFF.4060500@cmosnetworks.com> After reading all the arguments for and against an LTSP-based computer lab, and being in a large school district with "wireless everywhere", here's what I think. Dedicated LTSP computer labs are still the way to go. The whole point of a computer is as a tool to get work done. That means the teachers need to be able to monitor what the kids are doing. LTSP lends itself very well to just that. Additionally, only certain applications need to be enabled (OO.o and Firefox, chiefly). LTSP systems are easy and less time-consuming to maintain, especially as the number of devices / end terminals grows. Finally, computer security is much easier with LTSP, on several counts. --TP From brcisna at eazylivin.net Sat May 7 11:59:28 2011 From: brcisna at eazylivin.net (Barry R Cisna) Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 06:59:28 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Thoughts on paperless school Message-ID: <1304769568.4763.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hello All, I would like to hear some peoples view on trying to make a school paperless. I'll start it out by saying teachers,admins can always argue it is not possible,due to send outs to mommy and poppy etc. Reason I am thinking of this at present, is your's truly deals with the paper ordered and handling,,,:( of the pallets (stacked who knows how high) of paper each year! This year our school went completely nuts going through paper 8x10. Needless to say the printer cartridges that have been consumed in this years time (can you say plotter!!!) is almost sickening. We have been down the print management route in the past restricting pages per day printed. That idea went down the tubes in the first week after lotsa leg work getting it setup and in place. I have found,,unfortunately it is pretty much useless to show teachers little hints in regards to this scenario as for whatever reason they do not even want to learn how to do anything 'new/different'. Example. I showed some teachers how to instead of 'printing off' umpteen pages,,for a 24 hour reference thing to save it as pdf,and send it to their home email if they like as well. How could this thing be any simpler? About 1 out of 10 I can tell thought it to be a good idea. I use the analogy printing stuff off is like daily newspapers. What they print will be looked at (maybe) regardless of the multitude of possibilities, and 24 hours it is going to be in the trash anyway. My take is if paperless is 'forced' on everyone within the school building/district people WILL learn to do it,and in time realize its much cleaner simpler,quicker way of doing what the papered setup 'used' to do. Argument will be made mom/pop at home that don't have two nickels to rub together don't have a PC,in their home, to view Sonny's detention for example. Bottom line I have found little 5 year old kids in K have a smartphone nowadays,that I know their folks don't have two nickels to rub together,so they surely have a pc at home as well. I'm sure at this point every school is using SMS software (we even have it here in Podunk,,,) ) but this is such a small piece of the paper glut in schools. Sorry for long post. Take Care, BC From Steven at simplycircus.com Sat May 7 13:06:09 2011 From: Steven at simplycircus.com (Steven Santos) Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 09:06:09 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Thoughts on paperless school In-Reply-To: <1304769568.4763.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1304769568.4763.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: When you go that route, you tie everyone to a computer for all work. I don't think of that as is a good thing. Computers are a tool. So are pen and paper. Schools need to teach pen and paper more so than computers. Not to say they don't need to teach computers (they do), but not to the exclusivity of pen and paper. --- Steven Santos Director P: 617-527-0667 F: 617-934-1870 E: Steven at SimplyCircus.com Simply Circus, Inc. 86 Los Angeles Street Newton, MA 02462 On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Barry R Cisna wrote: > Hello All, > > I would like to hear some peoples view on trying to make a school > paperless. > I'll start it out by saying teachers,admins can always argue it is not > possible,due to send outs to mommy and poppy etc. > Reason I am thinking of this at present, is your's truly deals with the > paper ordered and handling,,,:( of the pallets (stacked who knows how > high) of paper each year! This year our school went completely nuts > going through paper 8x10. > Needless to say the printer cartridges that have been consumed in this > years time (can you say plotter!!!) is almost sickening. > We have been down the print management route in the past restricting > pages per day printed. That idea went down the tubes in the first week > after lotsa leg work getting it setup and in place. > I have found,,unfortunately it is pretty much useless to show teachers > little hints in regards to this scenario as for whatever reason they do > not even want to learn how to do anything 'new/different'. > Example. I showed some teachers how to instead of 'printing off' umpteen > pages,,for a 24 hour reference thing to save it as pdf,and send it to > their home email if they like as well. How could this thing be any > simpler? About 1 out of 10 I can tell thought it to be a good idea. > I use the analogy printing stuff off is like daily newspapers. What they > print will be looked at (maybe) regardless of the multitude of > possibilities, and 24 hours it is going to be in the trash anyway. > My take is if paperless is 'forced' on everyone within the school > building/district people WILL learn to do it,and in time realize its > much cleaner simpler,quicker way of doing what the papered setup 'used' > to do. > Argument will be made mom/pop at home that don't have two nickels to rub > together don't have a PC,in their home, to view Sonny's detention for > example. Bottom line I have found little 5 year old kids in K have a > smartphone nowadays,that I know their folks don't have two nickels to > rub together,so they surely have a pc at home as well. > I'm sure at this point every school is using SMS software (we even have > it here in Podunk,,,) ) but this is such a small piece of the paper glut > in schools. > Sorry for long post. > > Take Care, > BC > > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lesmikesell at gmail.com Sat May 7 15:28:54 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 10:28:54 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Thoughts on paperless school In-Reply-To: <1304769568.4763.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1304769568.4763.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4DC56536.5000309@gmail.com> On 5/7/11 6:59 AM, Barry R Cisna wrote: > > My take is if paperless is 'forced' on everyone within the school > building/district people WILL learn to do it,and in time realize its > much cleaner simpler,quicker way of doing what the papered setup 'used' > to do. Nobody likes having things forced on them, and the computer provides the interactivity to let everyone make their own choice. Have an 'opt-in' page where people individually can choose to go paperless (like your banks do...). And email something to parents that they must acknowledge if they want their notifications to come that way instead of paper. That way you at least know someone is receiving the email. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Sat May 7 15:52:33 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 10:52:33 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] [Bulk] Computer lab needed in Elementary school? In-Reply-To: References: <4DC3D186.9080007@yahoo.it> <4DC49ED7.3000600@scheie.homedns.org> Message-ID: <4DC56AC1.20303@gmail.com> On 5/7/11 1:38 AM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: > > If you think about applications and how the browser is THE new > platform then you can provide most apps through SaaS (Software as a > Service). OS agnostic as long as you have a browser. I think that's a good point and preferences for personal devices may be changing with advances in phones and tablets and cheaper laptops, but how do you handle video? Does anyone have that working well enough for a classroom on ltsp or over wireless? Or do you just use a projector where you need it for more than a few people at once? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Sat May 7 17:43:58 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 13:43:58 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> Message-ID: I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on what is available. On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/06/2011 12:05 PM, John Oligario wrote: >> One thing to be aware is to have an updated version of Linux. The >> d945gsejt does not have the proper drivers available on the Intel >> website. I went through this and created numerous problems in trying to >> make it work properly. > > I have deployed dozens of D945GSEJTs on Fedora 12+, never installed > anything special, and never had a problem. ?What version are you using? > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From toddobryan at gmail.com Sat May 7 19:45:35 2011 From: toddobryan at gmail.com (Todd O'Bryan) Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 15:45:35 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> Message-ID: I can recommend these cases: http://www.evercase.com/2product/e0526.htm Without drives, there's plenty of room for a microATX motherboard, and I put in a dual-core Athlon processor. The only fan is the CPU van, which vents directly to the outside of the box. The version I ordered had two USBs on the front, but didn't have the microphone and headphone ports. (The ones on the back work fine, but that may be an issue depending on what you want to use them for.) I've ordered 13 so far, and had one power supply go bad after about 6 weeks. The company did an RMA with only a limited amount of confusion (mostly I had to convince them that it really was a power supply from one of their cases). We ordered a board, CPU, and RAM, and my students and I put the 12 together in a couple of hours. Total cost per machine was about $175. Todd On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 1:43 PM, David Hopkins wrote: > I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 > with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on > what is available. > > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> On 05/06/2011 12:05 PM, John Oligario wrote: >>> One thing to be aware is to have an updated version of Linux. The >>> d945gsejt does not have the proper drivers available on the Intel >>> website. I went through this and created numerous problems in trying to >>> make it work properly. >> >> I have deployed dozens of D945GSEJTs on Fedora 12+, never installed >> anything special, and never had a problem. ?What version are you using? >> >> Jeff >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see >> > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From toddobryan at gmail.com Sat May 7 19:46:21 2011 From: toddobryan at gmail.com (Todd O'Bryan) Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 15:46:21 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> Message-ID: I should have mentioned that the cases also support mini-ITX boards, so you can use those, if you'd like. On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Todd O'Bryan wrote: > I can recommend these cases: > > http://www.evercase.com/2product/e0526.htm > > Without drives, there's plenty of room for a microATX motherboard, and > I put in a dual-core Athlon processor. The only fan is the CPU van, > which vents directly to the outside of the box. The version I ordered > had two USBs on the front, but didn't have the microphone and > headphone ports. (The ones on the back work fine, but that may be an > issue depending on what you want to use them for.) > > I've ordered 13 so far, and had one power supply go bad after about 6 > weeks. The company did an RMA with only a limited amount of confusion > (mostly I had to convince them that it really was a power supply from > one of their cases). We ordered a board, CPU, and RAM, and my students > and I put the 12 together in a couple of hours. Total cost per machine > was about $175. > > Todd > > On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 1:43 PM, David Hopkins wrote: >> I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 >> with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on >> what is available. >> >> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >>> On 05/06/2011 12:05 PM, John Oligario wrote: >>>> One thing to be aware is to have an updated version of Linux. The >>>> d945gsejt does not have the proper drivers available on the Intel >>>> website. I went through this and created numerous problems in trying to >>>> make it work properly. >>> >>> I have deployed dozens of D945GSEJTs on Fedora 12+, never installed >>> anything special, and never had a problem. ?What version are you using? >>> >>> Jeff >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> K12OSN mailing list >>> K12OSN at redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >>> For more info see >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see >> > From charlie at smbis.com Sat May 7 21:32:20 2011 From: charlie at smbis.com (Charlie) Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 17:32:20 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> Message-ID: <1304803940.5364.7.camel@lws1> Good luck with that CentOS 6 with LTSP 5.2. I haven't seen nor heard anything about RHEL 6 supporting LTSP, only VDI via SPICE. -----Original Message----- From: David Hopkins Reply-to: "Support list for open source software in schools." To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 13:43:58 -0400 CentOS 6 with LTSP 5.2 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Sun May 8 12:50:37 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 02:50:37 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora Message-ID: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> Hi folks, It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business and prepare for grad school. K12Linux LTSP EL6 ================= I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking to base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's work to make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 and EL6 and they both use Upstart. BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those versions of Fedora. At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from you the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past years. That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low hanging fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be the end. (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be willing to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if interested.) The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many years of life. However, since the only maintainable way we can build the client images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora version, this effectively means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be frozen forever in client hardware support. Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE ============================= Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora 15+, but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect continued support for LTSP in Fedora. * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working remote X desktops as it simply was never a priority. * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP would use. * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop support for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't already happened. * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like KDE or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is still a non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user experience since remote X is poorly tested there as well. For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to work on this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be officially supported by Fedora. Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization =================================================== http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when their client disconnects in order to conserve central server resources. The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although K12Linux would only document the Linux case. SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful enough to handle it. I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've only heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the almost untested remote X functionality. Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the coffin for the old LTSP model. This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer developers. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Sun May 8 16:40:44 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 11:40:44 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> On 5/8/11 7:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have excluded > certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this reason, we may > need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have > userspace capable of running on i586. I would need to see what are the supported > archs and kernels in those versions of Fedora. I've always thought it would be useful to have a generic PXE boot mechanism into a livecd image on the server. That way you could use any distribution's live cd or dvd image or use the tools they provide to build a custom version and it would work the same whether booted locally or over the network - and importantly for this use would not take per-client maintenance. I think DRBL can boot at least a clonezilla-live image but don't know if other images would work. > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of remote X. > Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat engineer working on > remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire Fedora distro will continue to > further drift away from working remote X desktops as it simply was never a > priority. That's ummm, extremely unfortunate. I gave up even looking at Fedora long ago because they seemed so out of touch with the way unix/linux is actually used, apparently wanting to turn it into a single-user toy. On the other hand, it is fairly likely that future client hardware would be able to run the desktop locally, given a way to boot a fairly fat client. > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > =================================================== > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology replacement > for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE and kvm, the Open > Source core components of a VDI solution. Is spice licensed for redistribution? I thought I just saw something mentioned on the Centos list that they couldn't include it in 6.x. > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop running > within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized servers. Maybe each > user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when their client disconnects in > order to conserve central server resources. > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and viewable with > the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would theoretically allow > K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both Windows or Linux virtualized > desktop machines, although K12Linux would only document the Linux case. Seems like the wrong way to go compared to booting something that can run video locally. That is, you are adding several layers that are going to require cpu cycles and probably use a less efficient network protocol than the original video source format. There would be some tradeoffs between beefing up the server and the clients, but needing to do both sounds wrong. > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of LTSP. > Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the coffin for the > old LTSP model. How would it compare to, say, running vlc directly on the client where for classroom use you could multicast the stream to scale out? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From charlie at smbis.com Sun May 8 18:49:19 2011 From: charlie at smbis.com (Charlie) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 14:49:19 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> Message-ID: <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due to this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't see LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. Red Hat is making a serious third mistake here; the first being no focus on desktop, second no focus on Terminal Services, as VDI is really only one component of the desktop solution options, and limited at that. Red Hat is losing a large chunk of revenue to competitors due to their lack of support for a small business server solution and Terminal Services, here again M$ has the lions share because they have a more comprehensive product set that addresses business needs, note that I didn't say better, just that they have a solution. Statistics clearly show that small and medium businesses make up greater than 90% or all businesses. Source: http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html Currently there are over 80 million Terminal Services clients deployed, while there are only ~2 million VDI deployments (source: http://www.brianmadden.com/, which is an excellent resource for information about remote desktop support and where it's going). The number of desktops supported on VDI vs Terminal Services is much lower because VDI deployments require far more resources per desktop than Terminal Services, as you noted in your comments below. Red Hat has lost significant business to M$ and now will start to do so with Ubuntu, as they do have a plan for Terminal Services and it works now, out of the box, and they have 100% backing by the vendor. If you think not, then do a search on youtube.com or google for k12linux and then do it for Ubuntu LTSP or Edubuntu. You will see clearly Red Hat is already slipping in the Terminal Services arena. Remember M$'s early days when they understood whoever owns the desktop, owns the server as well? Well, even Ubuntu figured at one out. In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in VDI. They could overcome a large part of the limitations of multimedia through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols like SPICE, and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized between the server and the thin client. -----Original Message----- From: Warren Togami Jr. Reply-to: "Support list for open source software in schools." To: K12LTSP Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 02:50:37 -1000 Hi folks, It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business and prepare for grad school. K12Linux LTSP EL6 ================= I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking to base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's work to make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 and EL6 and they both use Upstart. BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those versions of Fedora. At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from you the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past years. That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low hanging fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be the end. (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be willing to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if interested.) The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many years of life. However, since the only maintainable way we can build the client images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora version, this effectively means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be frozen forever in client hardware support. Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE ============================= Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora 15+, but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect continued support for LTSP in Fedora. * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working remote X desktops as it simply was never a priority. * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP would use. * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop support for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't already happened. * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like KDE or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is still a non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user experience since remote X is poorly tested there as well. For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to work on this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be officially supported by Fedora. Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization =================================================== http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when their client disconnects in order to conserve central server resources. The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although K12Linux would only document the Linux case. SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful enough to handle it. I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've only heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the almost untested remote X functionality. Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the coffin for the old LTSP model. This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer developers. Warren Togami warren at togami.com _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From microman at cmosnetworks.com Sun May 8 19:30:13 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 15:30:13 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> Message-ID: <4DC6EF45.6090203@cmosnetworks.com> This begs the question: should we even be looking at Red Hat anymore for this? Would, say, Slackware be a consideration for a K12Linux distro? I would say Debian, but we already have Edubuntu, so that's covered. --TP Charlie wrote: > If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business > strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making > updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due > to this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't > see LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. > > Red Hat is making a serious third mistake here; the first being no > focus on desktop, second no focus on Terminal Services, as VDI is > really only one component of the desktop solution options, and limited > at that. Red Hat is losing a large chunk of revenue to competitors > due to their lack of support for a small business server solution and > Terminal Services, here again M$ has the lions share because they have > a more comprehensive product set that addresses business needs, note > that I didn't say better, just that they have a solution. Statistics > clearly show that small and medium businesses make up greater than 90% > or all businesses. Source: http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html > > Currently there are over 80 million Terminal Services clients > deployed, while there are only ~2 million VDI deployments (source: > http://www.brianmadden.com/, which is an excellent resource for > information about remote desktop support and where it's going). The > number of desktops supported on VDI vs Terminal Services is much lower > because VDI deployments require far more resources per desktop than > Terminal Services, as you noted in your comments below. > > Red Hat has lost significant business to M$ and now will start to do > so with Ubuntu, as they do have a plan for Terminal Services and it > works now, out of the box, and they have 100% backing by the vendor. > If you think not, then do a search on youtube.com or google for > k12linux and then do it for Ubuntu LTSP or Edubuntu. You will see > clearly Red Hat is already slipping in the Terminal Services arena. > Remember M$'s early days when they understood whoever owns the > desktop, owns the server as well? Well, even Ubuntu figured at one out. > > In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously > invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in > VDI. They could overcome a large part of the limitations of > multimedia through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols > like SPICE, and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized > between the server and the thin client. > > -----Original Message----- > *From*: Warren Togami Jr. > > *Reply-to*: "Support list for open source software in schools." > > *To*: K12LTSP > > *Subject*: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora > *Date*: Sun, 08 May 2011 02:50:37 -1000 > > Hi folks, > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, > but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat > generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've > since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business > and prepare for grad school. > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > ================= > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking to > base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's work to > make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 and EL6 and > they both use Upstart. > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this > reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora > 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I > would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those > versions of Fedora. > > At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my > effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from you > the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past years. > That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low hanging > fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be the end. > > (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be willing > to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if interested.) > > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many years of > life. However, since the only maintainable way we can build the client > images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora version, this effectively > means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be frozen forever in client hardware > support. > > Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE > ============================= > Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora 15+, > but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect > continued support for LTSP in Fedora. > > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of > remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat > engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire > Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working remote X > desktops as it simply was never a priority. > > * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast > majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the > non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly > supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP would use. > > * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop support > for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't already happened. > > * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more > years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like KDE > or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is still a > non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user experience since > remote X is poorly tested there as well. > > For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to work on > this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be officially > supported by Fedora. > > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > =================================================== > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE > and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. > > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop > running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized > servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when > their client disconnects in order to conserve central server resources. > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and > viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would > theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both > Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although K12Linux would > only document the Linux case. > > SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first > generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful enough > to handle it. > > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've only > heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the almost > untested remote X functionality. > > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of > LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the > coffin for the old LTSP model. > > This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a > smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer > developers. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From charlie at smbis.com Sun May 8 20:12:01 2011 From: charlie at smbis.com (Charlie) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 16:12:01 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6EF45.6090203@cmosnetworks.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> <4DC6EF45.6090203@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: <1304885521.3965.19.camel@lws1> Personally, this coming school summer recess I plan to switch over to Ubuntu LTSPv5 for office and admin, and Edubuntu apps added for the students running as TCs, with only a couple full desktops running Ubuntu and Windoz. I also plan to look at Skolelinux / DebianEdu ( http://www.slx.no/en/product ), as they quote being able to do diskless as well as thin-client for desktops. Now that Ubuntu is cooperating more with the Debian developers, they both should benefit greatly. There may be other option like you mention, Slackware, or even SUSE since they are now going back home to Germany per Attachmate's recently announced plans. I really like Red Hat and wish they would get serious about the small business market opportunity and Terminal Services. -----Original Message----- From: Terrell Prude' Jr. Reply-to: "Support list for open source software in schools." To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 15:30:13 -0400 This begs the question: should we even be looking at Red Hat anymore for this? Would, say, Slackware be a consideration for a K12Linux distro? I would say Debian, but we already have Edubuntu, so that's covered. --TP Charlie wrote: > If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business > strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making > updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due > to this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't > see LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. > > Red Hat is making a serious third mistake here; the first being no > focus on desktop, second no focus on Terminal Services, as VDI is > really only one component of the desktop solution options, and limited > at that. Red Hat is losing a large chunk of revenue to competitors > due to their lack of support for a small business server solution and > Terminal Services, here again M$ has the lions share because they have > a more comprehensive product set that addresses business needs, note > that I didn't say better, just that they have a solution. Statistics > clearly show that small and medium businesses make up greater than 90% > or all businesses. Source: http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html > > Currently there are over 80 million Terminal Services clients > deployed, while there are only ~2 million VDI deployments (source: > http://www.brianmadden.com/, which is an excellent resource for > information about remote desktop support and where it's going). The > number of desktops supported on VDI vs Terminal Services is much lower > because VDI deployments require far more resources per desktop than > Terminal Services, as you noted in your comments below. > > Red Hat has lost significant business to M$ and now will start to do > so with Ubuntu, as they do have a plan for Terminal Services and it > works now, out of the box, and they have 100% backing by the vendor. > If you think not, then do a search on youtube.com or google for > k12linux and then do it for Ubuntu LTSP or Edubuntu. You will see > clearly Red Hat is already slipping in the Terminal Services arena. > Remember M$'s early days when they understood whoever owns the > desktop, owns the server as well? Well, even Ubuntu figured at one out. > > In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously > invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in > VDI. They could overcome a large part of the limitations of > multimedia through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols > like SPICE, and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized > between the server and the thin client. > > -----Original Message----- > *From*: Warren Togami Jr. > > *Reply-to*: "Support list for open source software in schools." > > *To*: K12LTSP > > *Subject*: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora > *Date*: Sun, 08 May 2011 02:50:37 -1000 > > Hi folks, > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, > but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat > generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've > since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business > and prepare for grad school. > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > ================= > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking to > base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's work to > make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 and EL6 and > they both use Upstart. > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this > reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora > 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I > would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those > versions of Fedora. > > At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my > effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from you > the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past years. > That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low hanging > fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be the end. > > (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be willing > to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if interested.) > > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many years of > life. However, since the only maintainable way we can build the client > images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora version, this effectively > means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be frozen forever in client hardware > support. > > Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE > ============================= > Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora 15+, > but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect > continued support for LTSP in Fedora. > > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of > remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat > engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire > Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working remote X > desktops as it simply was never a priority. > > * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast > majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the > non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly > supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP would use. > > * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop support > for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't already happened. > > * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more > years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like KDE > or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is still a > non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user experience since > remote X is poorly tested there as well. > > For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to work on > this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be officially > supported by Fedora. > > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > =================================================== > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE > and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. > > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop > running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized > servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when > their client disconnects in order to conserve central server resources. > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and > viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would > theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both > Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although K12Linux would > only document the Linux case. > > SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first > generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful enough > to handle it. > > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've only > heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the almost > untested remote X functionality. > > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of > LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the > coffin for the old LTSP model. > > This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a > smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer > developers. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Sun May 8 23:03:59 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 13:03:59 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> Message-ID: <4DC7215F.2090008@togami.com> On 5/8/2011 8:49 AM, Charlie wrote: > If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business > strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making > updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due to > this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't see > LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. This is a bit of an overstatement. I personally made sure that the technology in RHEL6 would be capable of supporting legacy LTSP no worse than previous versions of Fedora. RHEL6 contains GNOME 2 which works fine with LTSP and remote desktops. The ONLY major issue is the 32bit i686 minimum arch which excludes the vast majority of past LTSP client hardware. NOTE: I no longer work for Red Hat. > > In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously > invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in VDI. > They could overcome a large part of the limitations of multimedia > through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols like SPICE, > and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized between the > server and the thin client. I don't dispute that VDI has significant penetration, but the harsh truth is the LTSP approach to Terminal Servers has NEVER made any money for anybody. Ubuntu has tried and failed to sell support contracts for LTSP as a business model. It is a fantasy to believe that the old Terminal Server model makes business sense for anyone. Warren From warren at togami.com Sun May 8 23:06:11 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 13:06:11 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <1304885521.3965.19.camel@lws1> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> <4DC6EF45.6090203@cmosnetworks.com> <1304885521.3965.19.camel@lws1> Message-ID: <4DC721E3.7050608@togami.com> On 5/8/2011 10:12 AM, Charlie wrote: > Personally, this coming school summer recess I plan to switch over to > Ubuntu LTSPv5 for office and admin, and Edubuntu apps added for the > students running as TCs, with only a couple full desktops running Ubuntu > and Windoz. I also plan to look at Skolelinux / DebianEdu ( > http://www.slx.no/en/product ), as they quote being able to do diskless > as well as thin-client for desktops. Now that Ubuntu is cooperating more > with the Debian developers, they both should benefit greatly. There may > be other option like you mention, Slackware, or even SUSE since they are > now going back home to Germany per Attachmate's recently announced > plans. I really like Red Hat and wish they would get serious about the > small business market opportunity and Terminal Services. I know the Debian LTSP developers personally. They are good people, and Debian is a respectable Linux distribution with a similar commitment to liberty as Fedora. I can highly recommend Debian LTSP, because upstream ltsp.org features are developed for Debian first. Warren From warren at togami.com Sun May 8 23:29:06 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 13:29:06 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC72742.9020907@togami.com> On 5/8/2011 6:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of >> remote X. >> Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat engineer >> working on >> remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire Fedora distro will >> continue to >> further drift away from working remote X desktops as it simply was >> never a >> priority. > > That's ummm, extremely unfortunate. I gave up even looking at Fedora > long ago because they seemed so out of touch with the way unix/linux is > actually used, apparently wanting to turn it into a single-user toy. On This is really a point of view issue. In reality, the GNOME 3 direction pioneered by Fedora is what the vast majority of users want in the future. LTSP is and has always been in the extreme minority. > the other hand, it is fairly likely that future client hardware would be > able to run the desktop locally, given a way to boot a fairly fat client. This is a good point. This would effectively negate the issues of a remote desktop protocol and fully use the power of modern client hardware. However, this approach has always been a good idea. Yet oddly enough, nobody did it. I suspect it is because it requires significantly more effort to it was to make LTSP. With almost nothing running on the client, LTSP was very easy to deploy and manage. No matter how good an idea it might be, in reality it wont happen if people don't develop it. For years Eric Harrison was the only developer on RH LTSP, then it was only me for a few following years. For years I've asked this community for volunteer help but received almost none. In other words, talk is cheap. > >> Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization >> =================================================== >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization >> I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology >> replacement >> for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE and kvm, >> the Open >> Source core components of a VDI solution. > > Is spice licensed for redistribution? I thought I just saw something > mentioned on the Centos list that they couldn't include it in 6.x. This is a good question. My knowledge is a year old, but back then the core components of the SPICE client (sans remote USB) and kvm server-side were open source. The management solution is not Open Source, but a theoretical Fedora-based VDI solution would need to implement its own simple service to manage the virtual machines via the libvirt API. > >> A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop >> running >> within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized servers. >> Maybe each >> user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk when their client >> disconnects in >> order to conserve central server resources. >> >> The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and >> viewable with >> the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would theoretically allow >> K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of both Windows or Linux >> virtualized >> desktop machines, although K12Linux would only document the Linux case. > > Seems like the wrong way to go compared to booting something that can > run video locally. That is, you are adding several layers that are going > to require cpu cycles and probably use a less efficient network protocol > than the original video source format. There would be some tradeoffs > between beefing up the server and the clients, but needing to do both > sounds wrong. Again, I agree that netbooting semi-fat clients would perform better than any remote desktop protocol. But there are significant trade-offs. It is significantly easier to implement this, and manageability and security are significantly better with all desktop VM's running in a central location. > >> Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of >> LTSP. >> Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the coffin >> for the >> old LTSP model. > > How would it compare to, say, running vlc directly on the client where > for classroom use you could multicast the stream to scale out? > Of course vlc locally is better. But have you actually tried full-screen video on multi-monitor setups over the SPICE protocol? It is surprisingly not bad. Fairly low CPU usage on the server, moderate bandwidth to the client. The main bottleneck is the CPU of the client hardware. Video is not an issue with VDI. The lack of Composite is an issue that may make it infeasible as Fedora and Ubuntu both go to composite desktops by default. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 9 01:42:23 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 20:42:23 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC72742.9020907@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> <4DC72742.9020907@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DC7467F.6060203@gmail.com> On 5/8/11 6:29 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/8/2011 6:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality of >>> remote X. >>> Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat engineer >>> working on >>> remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire Fedora distro will >>> continue to >>> further drift away from working remote X desktops as it simply was >>> never a >>> priority. >> >> That's ummm, extremely unfortunate. I gave up even looking at Fedora >> long ago because they seemed so out of touch with the way unix/linux is >> actually used, apparently wanting to turn it into a single-user toy. On > > This is really a point of view issue. In reality, the GNOME 3 direction > pioneered by Fedora is what the vast majority of users want in the future. LTSP > is and has always been in the extreme minority. There is more to remote X than LTSP/thin clients. Personally I like freenx and almost never sit directly at a Linux console even though most of my work is on a Linux desktop. And I've always thought 'boot-into-nx' would be a reasonable thin client approach for wireless access using a CD or other local boot media. >> the other hand, it is fairly likely that future client hardware would be >> able to run the desktop locally, given a way to boot a fairly fat client. > > This is a good point. This would effectively negate the issues of a remote > desktop protocol and fully use the power of modern client hardware. > > However, this approach has always been a good idea. Yet oddly enough, nobody did > it. I suspect it is because it requires significantly more effort to it was to > make LTSP. With almost nothing running on the client, LTSP was very easy to > deploy and manage. In the beginning, clients were typically old PCs that wouldn't have been good at running much anyway. But now even discarded pcs or cheap new ones would be decent fat clients. There also was the issue of not having good hardware auto detection but with the example of Knoppix there are now many boot-and-run distributions, many of which have tools for custom rebuilds which would make it easy to have them come up with network authentication and home directory access. Now that part is available it would just be a matter of being able to PXE boot into custom images built with those same tools. > No matter how good an idea it might be, in reality it wont happen if people > don't develop it. For years Eric Harrison was the only developer on RH LTSP, > then it was only me for a few following years. For years I've asked this > community for volunteer help but received almost none. > > In other words, talk is cheap. I had the impression that the only reason for taking development into fedora which isn't particularly usable was that the packages would be built in a way that would minimize future maintenance and would be included in RHEL. If that is now all out the window, where would you suggest starting over? > > Again, I agree that netbooting semi-fat clients would perform better than any > remote desktop protocol. But there are significant trade-offs. It is > significantly easier to implement this, and manageability and security are > significantly better with all desktop VM's running in a central location. Maybe - but at this point counting on SPICE seems pretty theoretical, especially if the RHEL package isn't redistributable. The other issues really need to be solved anyway since a typical network will have an assortment of standalone boxes as well as the LTSP server and its clients - and the ability to boot a standard, centrally managed image would cover most of the maintenance issues. > Of course vlc locally is better. But have you actually tried full-screen video > on multi-monitor setups over the SPICE protocol? It is surprisingly not bad. > Fairly low CPU usage on the server, moderate bandwidth to the client. The main > bottleneck is the CPU of the client hardware. No, I haven't tried it. What would I have to run to test it? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From charlie at smbis.com Mon May 9 02:16:06 2011 From: charlie at smbis.com (Charlie) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 22:16:06 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC7215F.2090008@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> <4DC7215F.2090008@togami.com> Message-ID: <1304907366.3965.68.camel@lws1> See below... -----Original Message----- On 5/8/2011 8:49 AM, Charlie wrote: > If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business > strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making > updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due to > this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't see > LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. This is a bit of an overstatement. I personally made sure that the technology in RHEL6 would be capable of supporting legacy LTSP no worse than previous versions of Fedora. RHEL6 contains GNOME 2 which works fine with LTSP and remote desktops. The ONLY major issue is the 32bit i686 minimum arch which excludes the vast majority of past LTSP client hardware. NOTE: I no longer work for Red Hat. I would think updating minimal hardware technology requirements as simply being a part of technology evolution. This is not something that should get in the way of developing a product strategy. Given that i686 is in reality a very mature technology and most businesses have phased it out, so there should be plenty of i686 used/donated product out there. Why is it that Debian/Ubuntu have a LTSPv5 solution and Red Hat does not? I'm not talking about well if this or if that then RHELv6 would support a Fedora version, that is maybe one or two revisions behind and possibly not getting updates any longer, as being the solution. Again, Red Hat needs to get serious with a clear desktop solution strategy. VDI is only one, Terminal Services is another, Diskless Fat Client, Full stand-alone desktop is another... > > In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously > invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in VDI. > They could overcome a large part of the limitations of multimedia > through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols like SPICE, > and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized between the > server and the thin client. I don't dispute that VDI has significant penetration, but the harsh truth is the LTSP approach to Terminal Servers has NEVER made any money for anybody. Ubuntu has tried and failed to sell support contracts for LTSP as a business model. It is a fantasy to believe that the old Terminal Server model makes business sense for anyone. Actually the point was that VDI has only about 2% market penetration after two plus years as compared to Terminal Services. I also have to disagree with you here on Terminal Services model not making any business sense, please take some time and check out the http://www.brianmadden.org/ blog which totally refutes this. There are companies built around that model; Citrix, NX, 2X... M$ reworked their Terminal Services strategy a while back with Server 2008 to address this growing market. I know first hand companies that have recently deployed Terminal Services using thin clients to replace desktop PCs, primarily to reduce help support and PC upgrade costs. Reality is that as we migrate back to the central server in the data center (think mainframe era, only with a new twist) and cloud computing, where you have SaaS, Terminal Services makes more sense. Ideally a multiple approach to desktop solutions makes better sense, be it Thin-Client using LTSP or VDI, or Fat or Full Client desktop solutions, they all need to be on the table as options to meet customer requirements. Thanks for your feedback here as well as everything you do. Charlie Warren _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From charlie at smbis.com Mon May 9 02:27:26 2011 From: charlie at smbis.com (Charlie) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 22:27:26 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <1304907366.3965.68.camel@lws1> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <1304880559.1975.65.camel@lws1> <4DC7215F.2090008@togami.com> <1304907366.3965.68.camel@lws1> Message-ID: <1304908046.3965.73.camel@lws1> Correction that link to Brian Madden Blog is http://www.brianmadden.com/, and M$ Terminal Services I am referring to is their marketing name Remote Desktop Services (RDS), here is the link: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/rds-product-home.aspx -----Original Message----- From: Charlie Reply-to: charlie at smbis.com, "Support list for open source software in schools." To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 22:16:06 -0400 See below... -----Original Message----- On 5/8/2011 8:49 AM, Charlie wrote: > If Terminal Services is not a part of Red Hat's RHEL6 core business > strategy, there won't be any consideration given LTSP when making > updates or changes to RHEL6. K12Linux was a major disappointment due to > this very reason. Without a firm commitment from Red Hat, I don't see > LTSPv5 on RHEL6 ever being a viable reality. This is a bit of an overstatement. I personally made sure that the technology in RHEL6 would be capable of supporting legacy LTSP no worse than previous versions of Fedora. RHEL6 contains GNOME 2 which works fine with LTSP and remote desktops. The ONLY major issue is the 32bit i686 minimum arch which excludes the vast majority of past LTSP client hardware. NOTE: I no longer work for Red Hat. I would think updating minimal hardware technology requirements as simply being a part of technology evolution. This is not something that should get in the way of developing a product strategy. Given that i686 is in reality a very mature technology and most businesses have phased it out, so there should be plenty of i686 used/donated product out there. Why is it that Debian/Ubuntu have a LTSPv5 solution and Red Hat does not? I'm not talking about well if this or if that then RHELv6 would support a Fedora version, that is maybe one or two revisions behind and possibly not getting updates any longer, as being the solution. Again, Red Hat needs to get serious with a clear desktop solution strategy. VDI is only one, Terminal Services is another, Diskless Fat Client, Full stand-alone desktop is another... > > In MHO, I would think it would be more wise for Red Hat to seriously > invest in Terminal Services as much as or more than they have in VDI. > They could overcome a large part of the limitations of multimedia > through optimizations made to the remote desktop protocols like SPICE, > and how buffering and bandwidth are managed and utilized between the > server and the thin client. I don't dispute that VDI has significant penetration, but the harsh truth is the LTSP approach to Terminal Servers has NEVER made any money for anybody. Ubuntu has tried and failed to sell support contracts for LTSP as a business model. It is a fantasy to believe that the old Terminal Server model makes business sense for anyone. Actually the point was that VDI has only about 2% market penetration after two plus years as compared to Terminal Services. I also have to disagree with you here on Terminal Services model not making any business sense, please take some time and check out the http://www.brianmadden.org/ blog which totally refutes this. There are companies built around that model; Citrix, NX, 2X... M$ reworked their Terminal Services strategy a while back with Server 2008 to address this growing market. I know first hand companies that have recently deployed Terminal Services using thin clients to replace desktop PCs, primarily to reduce help support and PC upgrade costs. Reality is that as we migrate back to the central server in the data center (think mainframe era, only with a new twist) and cloud computing, where you have SaaS, Terminal Services makes more sense. Ideally a multiple approach to desktop solutions makes better sense, be it Thin-Client using LTSP or VDI, or Fat or Full Client desktop solutions, they all need to be on the table as options to meet customer requirements. Thanks for your feedback here as well as everything you do. Charlie Warren _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Mon May 9 02:56:15 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 16:56:15 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC7467F.6060203@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> <4DC72742.9020907@togami.com> <4DC7467F.6060203@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC757CF.3080403@togami.com> On 5/8/2011 3:42 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> That's ummm, extremely unfortunate. I gave up even looking at Fedora >>> long ago because they seemed so out of touch with the way unix/linux is >>> actually used, apparently wanting to turn it into a single-user toy. On >> >> This is really a point of view issue. In reality, the GNOME 3 direction >> pioneered by Fedora is what the vast majority of users want in the >> future. LTSP >> is and has always been in the extreme minority. > > There is more to remote X than LTSP/thin clients. Personally I like > freenx and almost never sit directly at a Linux console even though most > of my work is on a Linux desktop. And I've always thought 'boot-into-nx' > would be a reasonable thin client approach for wireless access using a > CD or other local boot media. I was only responding to your comment "seemed so out of touch with the way unix/linux is actually used". I meant that WE are the ones out of touch, not them. > >> No matter how good an idea it might be, in reality it wont happen if >> people >> don't develop it. For years Eric Harrison was the only developer on RH >> LTSP, >> then it was only me for a few following years. For years I've asked this >> community for volunteer help but received almost none. >> >> In other words, talk is cheap. > > I had the impression that the only reason for taking development into > fedora which isn't particularly usable was that the packages would be > built in a way that would minimize future maintenance and would be > included in RHEL. If that is now all out the window, where would you > suggest starting over? I did suggest in another reply that Debian LTSP is your best option, as Debian's goals are very different from RH it is actually a supportable solution in the long-term. I also applaud Debian's commitment to liberty that is similar to Fedora. Fedora and RHEL's priorities were very quickly moving away from legacy designs that would support LTSP with little effort. It was a constant struggle to make LTSP work when the efforts of hundreds of other engineers had conflicting priorities. Debian has entirely different goals, remaining firmly rooted in the past, which is why the long obsolete LTSP is so easy to support there. EL6 has enough of the legacy that it could be an awesome platform to support LTSP for its seven year lifespan. It would be great because RH updates the critical desktop apps like Firefox and LibreOffice for security and bug fixes through all those years. The only problem here is the 32bit userspace binaries and kernel no longer supports anything less than i686. (It may even require SSE2, not sure, so Pentium 3 and Athlon Thoroughbred may be too old as clients.) So it would require rebuilding all the packages for i586 and a new kernel in order to support LTSP. That may even be worth doing. I don't know. I will assess the feasibility. > >> >> Again, I agree that netbooting semi-fat clients would perform better >> than any >> remote desktop protocol. But there are significant trade-offs. It is >> significantly easier to implement this, and manageability and security >> are >> significantly better with all desktop VM's running in a central location. > > Maybe - but at this point counting on SPICE seems pretty theoretical, > especially if the RHEL package isn't redistributable. The other issues > really need to be solved anyway since a typical network will have an > assortment of standalone boxes as well as the LTSP server and its > clients - and the ability to boot a standard, centrally managed image > would cover most of the maintenance issues. Could you point out links to that centos discussion? Fedora ships the core of SPICE client and server, so I don't see how CentOS would be unable to ship it. Perhaps they were confused with the non-open management suite. It is DIFFICULT to use without the management suite. It's like using qemu with command line options. Functional but difficult. A K12Linux based on kvm would need a management wrapper written from scratch to make it simple. > >> Of course vlc locally is better. But have you actually tried >> full-screen video >> on multi-monitor setups over the SPICE protocol? It is surprisingly >> not bad. >> Fairly low CPU usage on the server, moderate bandwidth to the client. >> The main >> bottleneck is the CPU of the client hardware. > > No, I haven't tried it. What would I have to run to test it? > Too difficult to explain quickly. Warren From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 9 05:41:25 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 00:41:25 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC757CF.3080403@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC6C78C.9090205@gmail.com> <4DC72742.9020907@togami.com> <4DC7467F.6060203@gmail.com> <4DC757CF.3080403@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DC77E85.8050008@gmail.com> On 5/8/11 9:56 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > >> There is more to remote X than LTSP/thin clients. Personally I like >> freenx and almost never sit directly at a Linux console even though most >> of my work is on a Linux desktop. And I've always thought 'boot-into-nx' >> would be a reasonable thin client approach for wireless access using a >> CD or other local boot media. > > I was only responding to your comment "seemed so out of touch with the way > unix/linux is actually used". I meant that WE are the ones out of touch, not them. > And I meant that they are turning it into something that doesn't suit the reasons I've used unix/linux systems. If that means I'm out of touch, fine, but if I want a single user box that needs one special console attached in a certain place and forces you to sit there to do anything useful, I probably wouldn't be using unix/linux. >> Maybe - but at this point counting on SPICE seems pretty theoretical, >> especially if the RHEL package isn't redistributable. The other issues >> really need to be solved anyway since a typical network will have an >> assortment of standalone boxes as well as the LTSP server and its >> clients - and the ability to boot a standard, centrally managed image >> would cover most of the maintenance issues. > > Could you point out links to that centos discussion? Fedora ships the core of > SPICE client and server, so I don't see how CentOS would be unable to ship it. > Perhaps they were confused with the non-open management suite. I guess I overstated the issue - it was just the spice-usb-redirector package: http://www.linux-archive.org/centos-development/523021-missing-package-spice-usb-redirector-ceea-2010-0460-a.html -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From news at siddall.name Mon May 9 13:57:29 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 09:57:29 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> On 05/07/2011 01:43 PM, David Hopkins wrote: > I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 > with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on > what is available. Hmmm... Not sure about edubuntu but I always found Ubuntu's kernels were awfully old -- really that is the main reason I went to Fedora in the first place! Anyway, CentOS 6 should have a plenty new kernel (and I hope any new ubuntu based OS would also) to support the Atom chipsets so the problem should be a thing of the past. Jeff From news at siddall.name Mon May 9 14:19:36 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 10:19:36 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> On 05/08/2011 08:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi folks, > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, > but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat > generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've > since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business > and prepare for grad school. > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > ================= > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. Thanks Warren, I am eagerly awaiting this as a long term migration platform for my current K12Linux systems. > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this > reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora > 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I > would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those > versions of Fedora. Personally I don't care about this really. Even the lowly Atom is i686 and as I have argued on this list before the business case for re-using old fat desktop hardware doesn't exist if you consider the cost of power. I am far more concerned with the easy manageability LTSP provides. > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many years of > life. However, since the only maintainable way we can build the client > images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora version, this effectively > means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be frozen forever in client hardware > support. I am happy with the prospect of 7 more years of LTSP. I certainly hope that 7 years from now we have a better solution! > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > =================================================== > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol SPICE > and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. I already added a GSoC request for someone to implement just that. I think this would be a great LTSP replacement. > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've only > heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the almost > untested remote X functionality. I agree with all this although I can't imagine SPICE going far without compositing. We already have that in legacy remote X! > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X of > LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail in the > coffin for the old LTSP model. Honestly this is my biggest problem with LTSP right now. Video in LTSP just plain sucks. I for one think LTSP5 on CentOS 6 (or equiv.) would be a great solution for the foreseeable future and am really hoping you find the time/encouragement to do it. Jeff From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 9 14:45:24 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 09:45:24 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> On 5/9/2011 8:57 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/07/2011 01:43 PM, David Hopkins wrote: >> I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 >> with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on >> what is available. > > Hmmm... Not sure about edubuntu but I always found Ubuntu's kernels were > awfully old -- really that is the main reason I went to Fedora in the > first place! I've always looked at kernels as standardized interfaces to hardware and don't see much reason to change until the hardware is replace with something unsupported (other than bug fixes which are more likely to be done correctly for old versions than new ones that will bring new bugs). What new kernel features can't you live without? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From news at siddall.name Mon May 9 14:58:01 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 10:58:01 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> On 05/09/2011 10:45 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/9/2011 8:57 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> On 05/07/2011 01:43 PM, David Hopkins wrote: >>> I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 >>> with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on >>> what is available. >> >> Hmmm... Not sure about edubuntu but I always found Ubuntu's kernels were >> awfully old -- really that is the main reason I went to Fedora in the >> first place! > > I've always looked at kernels as standardized interfaces to hardware and > don't see much reason to change until the hardware is replace with > something unsupported (other than bug fixes which are more likely to be > done correctly for old versions than new ones that will bring new bugs). > What new kernel features can't you live without? Exactly: "..the hardware is replace with something unsupported..." Ubuntu didn't have the drivers for my hardware whereas Fedora did. Simple as that. In this case the issue was xorg drivers, but I have also had issues with video capture/decoded cards, LAN cards, wireless cards, touchscreens etc. Jeff From SHarbour at nwresd.k12.or.us Mon May 9 15:09:37 2011 From: SHarbour at nwresd.k12.or.us (Sean Harbour) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:09:37 +0000 Subject: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server Message-ID: <2F00F05A36DEBE4CA6FF253FF64ED8DD4FC397@wsc-mail-02.intra.nwresd.k12.or.us> I agree with Les, use two fast but inexpensive desktop machines. Two hard drives per machine in a raid 1 would be preferable over one drive per machine. You can have high performance and reliability. Plus, upgrades are easy, simply take one at a time offline for maintenance. The simplest load balancing method is easy to implement. Plug both servers into the same client switch, and setup their DHCP scopes with the same subnet, but give Server A the low range, say, 64-128, and give server B the high range, say, 129-193. Least loaded server wins the client DHCP request every time, and no conflicts. If Server A goes down, affected clients reboot and are automatically picked up by Server B. You can setup a third server class machine for the NFS homes so clients won't have two separate homes, but it's not strictly necessary depending on how and where the kids store documents. Thanks, Sean Harbour Senior Network Engineer Northwest Regional Education Service District Hillsboro, OR 97124 sharbour at nwresd.k12.or.us 503-614-1448 Messages to and from this e-mail address may be made available to the public under Oregon law. ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 13:19:49 -0500 From: Les Mikesell To: k12osn at redhat.com Subject: Re: [K12OSN] New Building's LTSP Server Message-ID: <4DC2EA45.4070907 at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 5/5/2011 12:53 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > A decent _new_ desktop system has more than 10X the performance, more > than 10X the storage and likely 4X the RAM of that server. Getting a > server that can keep up with that performance will cost $$$ thousands. An ltsp server is sort-of a special case where you need the CPU performance because you are running the client desktops and apps (unless you have local apps) and you also need disk reliability. I think there is a case for using an older, slower but sever-class (dual power supplies, hardware raid, etc.) machine as an NFS and authentication server with one or more fast desktop machines (lots of RAM but otherwise cheap) acting as the ltsp servers - and being mostly interchangeable or even disposable. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 9 15:40:59 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 10:40:59 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC80B0B.1090005@gmail.com> On 5/9/2011 9:58 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > >>>> I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 >>>> with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on >>>> what is available. >>> >>> Hmmm... Not sure about edubuntu but I always found Ubuntu's kernels were >>> awfully old -- really that is the main reason I went to Fedora in the >>> first place! >> >> I've always looked at kernels as standardized interfaces to hardware and >> don't see much reason to change until the hardware is replace with >> something unsupported (other than bug fixes which are more likely to be >> done correctly for old versions than new ones that will bring new bugs). >> What new kernel features can't you live without? > > Exactly: "..the hardware is replace with something unsupported..." > > Ubuntu didn't have the drivers for my hardware whereas Fedora did. > Simple as that. > > In this case the issue was xorg drivers, but I have also had issues with > video capture/decoded cards, LAN cards, wireless cards, touchscreens etc. I gave up the 'install new versions every week' game that fedora plays long ago, but back when I tried to keep up (and before their ever-changing kernel simply wouldn't boot after a mid-version update on the fairly mainstream IBM box I used for testing), I had the impression that ubuntu and fedora regularly leapfrogged each other so that which you considered newer or having better hardware support would depend on which one had just done the most recent release (or just fixed the bug that affected your specific hardware in the earlier versions they were shipping...). -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From news at siddall.name Mon May 9 17:48:00 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 13:48:00 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC80B0B.1090005@gmail.com> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> <4DC80B0B.1090005@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DC828D0.6090906@siddall.name> On 05/09/2011 11:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/9/2011 9:58 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> >>>>> I am currently using Edubuntu 9.10 and will move to either CentOS 6 >>>>> with LTSP 5.2 or Edubuntu latest version over the summer, depending on >>>>> what is available. >>>> >>>> Hmmm... Not sure about edubuntu but I always found Ubuntu's kernels >>>> were >>>> awfully old -- really that is the main reason I went to Fedora in the >>>> first place! >>> >>> I've always looked at kernels as standardized interfaces to hardware and >>> don't see much reason to change until the hardware is replace with >>> something unsupported (other than bug fixes which are more likely to be >>> done correctly for old versions than new ones that will bring new bugs). >>> What new kernel features can't you live without? >> >> Exactly: "..the hardware is replace with something unsupported..." >> >> Ubuntu didn't have the drivers for my hardware whereas Fedora did. >> Simple as that. >> >> In this case the issue was xorg drivers, but I have also had issues with >> video capture/decoded cards, LAN cards, wireless cards, touchscreens etc. > > I gave up the 'install new versions every week' game that fedora plays > long ago, but back when I tried to keep up (and before their > ever-changing kernel simply wouldn't boot after a mid-version update on > the fairly mainstream IBM box I used for testing), I had the impression > that ubuntu and fedora regularly leapfrogged each other so that which > you considered newer or having better hardware support would depend on > which one had just done the most recent release (or just fixed the bug > that affected your specific hardware in the earlier versions they were > shipping...). Well, Fedora is certainly a bleeding edge disto with a strong emphasis on the _bleeding_ part :) Things got a lot better for me when I switched to automatically installing only security updates. Anyway, Fedora upgrades kernels throughout the distro's support life whereas Ubuntu does not (well, last I checked which was admittedly quite a while ago). So if both Fedora and Ubuntu released a new distro today they might be pretty close, but over the next year Ubuntu would be further and further out of date. I think this may be a bigger issue when an LTS is being released (ie: all the even versions) which coincidentally was when I gave up using Ubuntu. LTS releases seem to use older kernels whereas odd releases seem to use a recent kernel. From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 9 19:46:02 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 14:46:02 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC828D0.6090906@siddall.name> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> <4DC80B0B.1090005@gmail.com> <4DC828D0.6090906@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DC8447A.2060806@gmail.com> On 5/9/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > Well, Fedora is certainly a bleeding edge disto with a strong emphasis > on the _bleeding_ part :) Things got a lot better for me when I > switched to automatically installing only security updates. > > Anyway, Fedora upgrades kernels throughout the distro's support life > whereas Ubuntu does not (well, last I checked which was admittedly quite > a while ago). So if both Fedora and Ubuntu released a new distro today > they might be pretty close, but over the next year Ubuntu would be > further and further out of date. So if you buy hardware that isn't backwards compatible with anything a year old it might not work with ubuntu... My approach is that if it hurts, don't do it. > I think this may be a bigger issue when an LTS is being released (ie: > all the even versions) which coincidentally was when I gave up using > Ubuntu. LTS releases seem to use older kernels whereas odd releases > seem to use a recent kernel. My only issue with ubuntu/debian is that I'm too lazy to learn to type multiple apt-get commands instead of yum - and all the other differences in admin quirks compared to RH style (just as quirky, but it's the devil I know). I did have one promising experience with ubuntu LTS, though. I had installed it to run both as dual-boot and under vmware on my windows laptop because Centos didn't recognize the wifi adapter, starting with the 8.04 LTS version. Much later when running under vmware player it offered to update itself to 10.04 which seemed to go smoothly - and it still comes up working when booted natively. I'm not used to major version upgrades working over the network, let alone handling the vmware and native view of devices afterward. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From julius at turtle.com Tue May 10 03:22:22 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 23:22:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] sudden apearance of X errors Message-ID: Dear Folks, I googled and googled and noodled and noodled, to no avail. On one of my LTSP Centos 5.6 servers I started to get the "gdm_slave_xioerror_handler: Fatal X error - Restarting" It happens on all the terminals and what's worse, there were no changes in configs made on that server. The terminals are unusable because they go into X restart within a minute of login. Changing to KDE makes no difference. I looked for obvious culprits like no disk space and xfs not running. I've set USE_XFS = N, just to be safe. I've run a full yum update, to no avail. Ideas, please? Julius From brcisna at eazylivin.net Tue May 10 13:07:39 2011 From: brcisna at eazylivin.net (Barry Cisna) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 08:07:39 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] sudden apearance of X errors Message-ID: <1305032859.2806.3.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Julius, Could you give a little more detail on what version of k12ltsp you are running? Is it 32-bit? Do you have a previous kernel version that you can boot to, to see if the x errors still are generated? Have you run a memtest86 memory test on this server from the Centos disk 1 CD? Barry From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Tue May 10 12:39:49 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 08:39:49 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <4DC8447A.2060806@gmail.com> References: <4DC41A04.1090900@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF093313036888A2@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DC44D93.3000904@siddall.name> <4DC7F2C9.5080304@siddall.name> <4DC7FE04.1010706@gmail.com> <4DC800F9.4090401@siddall.name> <4DC80B0B.1090005@gmail.com> <4DC828D0.6090906@siddall.name> <4DC8447A.2060806@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thank you for the suggestions and discussions of pro/con of the various distributions. I'll be purchasing one of each and testing in-house before making a decision. Sincerely, Dave Hopkins On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/9/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> >> Well, Fedora is certainly a bleeding edge disto with a strong emphasis >> on the _bleeding_ part :) ?Things got a lot better for me when I >> switched to automatically installing only security updates. >> >> Anyway, Fedora upgrades kernels throughout the distro's support life >> whereas Ubuntu does not (well, last I checked which was admittedly quite >> a while ago). ?So if both Fedora and Ubuntu released a new distro today >> they might be pretty close, but over the next year Ubuntu would be >> further and further out of date. > > So if you buy hardware that isn't backwards compatible with anything a year > old it might not work with ubuntu... ?My approach is that if it hurts, don't > do it. > >> I think this may be a bigger issue when an LTS is being released (ie: >> all the even versions) which coincidentally was when I gave up using >> Ubuntu. ?LTS releases seem to use older kernels whereas odd releases >> seem to use a recent kernel. > > My only issue with ubuntu/debian is that I'm too lazy to learn to type > multiple apt-get commands instead of yum - and all the other differences in > admin quirks compared to RH style (just as quirky, but it's the devil I > know). ?I did have one promising experience with ubuntu LTS, though. I had > installed it to run both as dual-boot and under vmware on my windows laptop > because Centos didn't recognize the wifi adapter, starting with the 8.04 LTS > version. ?Much later when running under vmware player it offered to update > itself to 10.04 which seemed to go smoothly - and it still comes up working > when booted natively. ?I'm not used to major version upgrades working over > the network, let alone handling the vmware and native view of devices > afterward. > > -- > ?Les Mikesell > ? lesmikesell at gmail.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From SHarbour at nwresd.k12.or.us Tue May 10 17:00:10 2011 From: SHarbour at nwresd.k12.or.us (Sean Harbour) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:00:10 +0000 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations Message-ID: <2F00F05A36DEBE4CA6FF253FF64ED8DD4FCF82@wsc-mail-02.intra.nwresd.k12.or.us> >Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 13:48:00 -0400 >From: Jeff Siddall >To: "Support list for open source software in schools." > >Subject: Re: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations >Message-ID: <4DC828D0.6090906 at siddall.name> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > >Anyway, Fedora upgrades kernels throughout the distro's support life >whereas Ubuntu does not (well, last I checked which was admittedly quite >a while ago). So if both Fedora and Ubuntu released a new distro today >they might be pretty close, but over the next year Ubuntu would be >further and further out of date. My own experiences would tend to dispute that, at least for the last 3 years or so. My boxes seem to get new kernels every few weeks. Perhaps you had a default setting changed to disable kernel updates? cat /home/grub/menu.lst title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-29-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-29-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-29-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-29-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-29-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-29-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-26-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-26-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-26-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-26-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-26-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-26-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-23-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-23-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-23-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-23-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-23-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-23-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-22-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-22-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-22-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.35-22-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-22-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-22-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.32-25-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-25-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-25-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.32-25-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-25-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-25-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-22-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-22-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-22-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-22-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-22-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-22-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-20-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-20-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-20-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-20-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-20-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-20-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-14-generic root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-14-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro quiet splash initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-14-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, kernel 2.6.31-14-generic (recovery mode) root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-14-generic root=/dev/mapper/isw_bjhdgdhfhc_Volume01 ro single initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.31-14-generic title Ubuntu 10.10, memtest86+ root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/memtest86+.bin ### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST Thanks, Sean Harbour Senior Network Engineer Northwest Regional Education Service District Hillsboro, OR 97124 sharbour at nwresd.k12.or.us 503-614-1448 Messages to and from this e-mail address may be made available to the public under Oregon law. From news at siddall.name Tue May 10 20:56:50 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 16:56:50 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] New thin client recommendations In-Reply-To: <2F00F05A36DEBE4CA6FF253FF64ED8DD4FCF82@wsc-mail-02.intra.nwresd.k12.or.us> References: <2F00F05A36DEBE4CA6FF253FF64ED8DD4FCF82@wsc-mail-02.intra.nwresd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: <4DC9A692.5090503@siddall.name> On 05/10/2011 01:00 PM, Sean Harbour wrote: >> Anyway, Fedora upgrades kernels throughout the distro's support life >> whereas Ubuntu does not (well, last I checked which was admittedly quite >> a while ago). So if both Fedora and Ubuntu released a new distro today >> they might be pretty close, but over the next year Ubuntu would be >> further and further out of date. > > > My own experiences would tend to dispute that, at least for the last 3 years or so. My boxes seem to get new kernels every few weeks. Perhaps you had a default setting changed to disable kernel updates? Sean, Thanks for the info. Looks like things are pretty comparable now. Jeff From julius at turtle.com Tue May 10 21:22:36 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:22:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] sudden apearance of X errors - solved In-Reply-To: <1305032859.2806.3.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: Barry, server 64 bit Centos 5.6, Ltsp 32 bit 4.x. Turns out I was chasing my own tail. The problem turned out to be hardware related, more specifically, network related. A well meaning soul laid his hands on the key to the attendance hand scanner and to make sure it works perfectly well changed the address on it to be the same as the eth0 address on the server. People won't tell me who it was. I went about finding the solution by first admitting it is not a software problem and then disconnecting switches from the stack. Once I got it down to a particular switch I disconnected all the ports and reconnected them one by one. Culprit was found, but not immediately. What a pain. Thank you very much for your support. Julius On Tue, 10 May 2011, Barry Cisna wrote: > Julius, > > Could you give a little more detail on what version of k12ltsp you are > running? > Is it 32-bit? > Do you have a previous kernel version that you can boot to, to see if > the x errors still are generated? > Have you run a memtest86 memory test on this server from the Centos disk > 1 CD? > > Barry > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From lesmikesell at gmail.com Tue May 10 22:29:19 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:29:19 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] sudden apearance of X errors - solved In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC9BC3F.3020904@gmail.com> On 5/10/2011 4:22 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > Barry, > server 64 bit Centos 5.6, Ltsp 32 bit 4.x. > > Turns out I was chasing my own tail. The problem turned out to be hardware > related, more specifically, network related. A well meaning soul laid his > hands on the key to the attendance hand scanner and to make sure it works > perfectly well changed the address on it to be the same as the eth0 > address on the server. People won't tell me who it was. > > I went about finding the solution by first admitting it is not a > software problem and then disconnecting switches from the stack. Once I > got it down to a particular switch I disconnected all the ports and > reconnected them one by one. Culprit was found, but not immediately. What > a pain. I was going to suggest watching the network activity with wireshark but I'm not sure you would have seen packets from the rouge device - the switch probably would have diverted the ones that should have been coming to you. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From julius at turtle.com Wed May 11 01:49:29 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 21:49:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] sudden apearance of X errors - solved In-Reply-To: <4DC9BC3F.3020904@gmail.com> References: <4DC9BC3F.3020904@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47298.216.216.171.235.1305078569.squirrel@216.216.171.235> Les, excellent suggestion. The problem is that the duplicated server address is the hardest to detect. The tools opn HP switches are not adequate. What helped most was interviewing all the people who could have had even remotest possibility to mess with networked equipement. In other words, network engineering married to social engerineering. Having a runner that everybody likes helped a lot. julius > On 5/10/2011 4:22 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: >> Barry, >> server 64 bit Centos 5.6, Ltsp 32 bit 4.x. >> >> Turns out I was chasing my own tail. The problem turned out to be >> hardware >> related, more specifically, network related. A well meaning soul laid >> his >> hands on the key to the attendance hand scanner and to make sure it >> works >> perfectly well changed the address on it to be the same as the eth0 >> address on the server. People won't tell me who it was. >> >> I went about finding the solution by first admitting it is not a >> software problem and then disconnecting switches from the stack. Once I >> got it down to a particular switch I disconnected all the ports and >> reconnected them one by one. Culprit was found, but not immediately. >> What >> a pain. > > I was going to suggest watching the network activity with wireshark but > I'm not sure you would have seen packets from the rouge device - the > switch probably would have diverted the ones that should have been > coming to you. > > -- > Les Mikesell > lesmikesell at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From warren at togami.com Wed May 11 22:15:26 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:15:26 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> On 5/9/2011 4:19 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/08/2011 08:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, >> but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat >> generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've >> since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business >> and prepare for grad school. >> >> K12Linux LTSP EL6 >> ================= >> I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > Thanks Warren, I am eagerly awaiting this as a long term migration > platform for my current K12Linux systems. I am reconsidering the worth of working on this project. This has not been much of a positive response. In fact most of the response has been only bitching from people who want everything but are willing to contribute nothing. Not having worked on this for years I had forgot how thankless this work is. I may consider releasing it only if enough people are willing to donate to make this thankless grief worthwhile. > >> BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have >> excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this >> reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora >> 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I >> would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those >> versions of Fedora. > > Personally I don't care about this really. Even the lowly Atom is i686 > and as I have argued on this list before the business case for re-using > old fat desktop hardware doesn't exist if you consider the cost of > power. I am far more concerned with the easy manageability LTSP provides. I have since discovered the actual minimum requirements for 32bit EL6. i686 minimum, and the kernel requires PAE hardware. Some discussion seems to suggest it is reasonably easy to rebuild the EL6 kernel without PAE. i686 is considered to be: * "Pentium Pro or later" * "AMD K6 (but not all) or later" * "Via C7" or later * Geode LX, but not Geode GX So minimal effort would support only more recent LTSP clients, which I guess would be the minority of deployed hardware. Warren From warren at togami.com Wed May 11 22:20:53 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:20:53 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> On 5/11/2011 12:15 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > > i686 is considered to be: > > * "Pentium Pro or later" > * "AMD K6 (but not all) or later" > * "Via C7" or later > * Geode LX, but not Geode GX OK, Geode LX may not be supported either, likely due to the userspace libraries being built with certain compiler flags. Warren From jim.kinney at gmail.com Wed May 11 23:07:04 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 19:07:04 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> Message-ID: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/9/2011 4:19 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > >> On 05/08/2011 08:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, >>> but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat >>> generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've >>> since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business >>> and prepare for grad school. >>> >>> K12Linux LTSP EL6 >>> ================= >>> I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. >>> >> >> Thanks Warren, I am eagerly awaiting this as a long term migration >> platform for my current K12Linux systems. >> > > I am reconsidering the worth of working on this project. This has not been > much of a positive response. In fact most of the response has been only > bitching from people who want everything but are willing to contribute > nothing. Not having worked on this for years I had forgot how thankless > this work is. > > I may consider releasing it only if enough people are willing to donate to > make this thankless grief worthwhile. > It _is_ a pile of work. Unfortunately, keeping support in place for the rapidly aging piles of old hardware used by schools is going to be a growing problem. It's not going to be solvable by sticking to the Fedora distro tree for the clients. It's going to involve either building a mechanism that will provide the old clients with same code but compiled for their old hardware from either an alternate distro (not too hard to do) or require an "in the field" build process that can be run to provide the capabilities. The later, especially if building a full distro, is just not feasible. I was looking at the need a few years back when I was pounding on K12LTSP for a process to determine the capabilities of a client by using a _very_ compatible kernel for an initial tftp load with an initrd that has every known and buildable modules. So the system runs a hardware test mode to see what is available, sends that data back to the master node and either a custom kernel/module pack is built or is uses an existing one based on a database lookup of hardware known to the system. Once found it resets the tftp kernel to be a real one. hehe, I even named this process "shoe-horn" (from the cobbler/koan line of thinking) as it helps the system fit into a tight boot :-) I'm moving back to the LTSP world more so I'll be able to pitch in some help and build systems (as soon as I get mock and koji playing nicely at home). > > >> BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have >>> excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For this >>> reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on Fedora >>> 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on i586. I >>> would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels in those >>> versions of Fedora. >>> >> >> Personally I don't care about this really. Even the lowly Atom is i686 >> and as I have argued on this list before the business case for re-using >> old fat desktop hardware doesn't exist if you consider the cost of >> power. I am far more concerned with the easy manageability LTSP provides. >> > > I have since discovered the actual minimum requirements for 32bit EL6. i686 > minimum, and the kernel requires PAE hardware. Some discussion seems to > suggest it is reasonably easy to rebuild the EL6 kernel without PAE. > Monthly power bills are always bad with old crap running. But to add in getting new hardware (spend now + deploy in a few months) PLUS the bad power bills is just not an option for most schools right now. What they that does work is better than what they want that they can't afford to buy without laying off another round of teachers. So we have to find a way to keep that old crap running for them a while longer. So maybe a full release build that will run on i386, no upgraded flags, with a minimal X environment is feasible. Dunno. I've never compiled a full distro before. Maybe it' time I did. > > i686 is considered to be: > > * "Pentium Pro or later" > * "AMD K6 (but not all) or later" > * "Via C7" or later > * Geode LX, but not Geode GX > > So minimal effort would support only more recent LTSP clients, which I > guess would be the minority of deployed hardware. > > Warren > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Wed May 11 23:18:42 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:18:42 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> On 5/11/2011 1:07 PM, Jim Kinney wrote: > > Monthly power bills are always bad with old crap running. But to add in > getting new hardware (spend now + deploy in a few months) PLUS the bad > power bills is just not an option for most schools right now. What they > that does work is better than what they want that they can't afford to > buy without laying off another round of teachers. > > So we have to find a way to keep that old crap running for them a while > longer. So maybe a full release build that will run on i386, no upgraded > flags, with a minimal X environment is feasible. Dunno. I've never > compiled a full distro before. Maybe it' time I did. Reconfiguring and rebuilding all the necessary packages might make it 1000% extra work, especially if you try to do so for package updates later, if you want to take advantage of bug fixes and driver improvements to improve client hardware support. This may be the infeasible part. Warren From jim.kinney at gmail.com Wed May 11 23:26:57 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 19:26:57 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> Message-ID: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/11/2011 1:07 PM, Jim Kinney wrote: > >> >> Monthly power bills are always bad with old crap running. But to add in >> getting new hardware (spend now + deploy in a few months) PLUS the bad >> power bills is just not an option for most schools right now. What they >> that does work is better than what they want that they can't afford to >> buy without laying off another round of teachers. >> >> So we have to find a way to keep that old crap running for them a while >> longer. So maybe a full release build that will run on i386, no upgraded >> flags, with a minimal X environment is feasible. Dunno. I've never >> compiled a full distro before. Maybe it' time I did. >> > > Reconfiguring and rebuilding all the necessary packages might make it 1000% > extra work, especially if you try to do so for package updates later, if you > want to take advantage of bug fixes and driver improvements to improve > client hardware support. This may be the infeasible part. That's why the ONLY way it can work is to have something like a koji system working on the auto-builds. The raw assumption is that most things can be built for minimal hardware with a basic recompile using flags for minimal hardware. So a patch file is needed but most likely a configuration setting for the mock backend for koji. > > Warren > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From news at siddall.name Thu May 12 01:49:42 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 21:49:42 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> On 05/11/2011 06:20 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/11/2011 12:15 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> >> i686 is considered to be: >> >> * "Pentium Pro or later" >> * "AMD K6 (but not all) or later" >> * "Via C7" or later >> * Geode LX, but not Geode GX > > OK, Geode LX may not be supported either, likely due to the userspace > libraries being built with certain compiler flags. > > Warren I guess my "lowly" Atom clients are screamers compared to some people's old junk but can't those people with really ancient hardware just stick with K12LTSP (LTSP4)? Anyone running K12Linux has already had to deal with the lack of i586 support for a number of years now. Even if new clients were required to keep things running for another seven years (is that really so bad?), it's literally a matter of $86 per machine to get an 1.66 GHz Atom D410 and 1 GB DDR2 RAM from newegg.com. Some searching could probably find some even cheaper options. Jeff From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 12 02:12:55 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 21:12:55 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCB4227.2080102@gmail.com> On 5/11/11 5:15 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > I am reconsidering the worth of working on this project. This has not been much > of a positive response. In fact most of the response has been only bitching from > people who want everything but are willing to contribute nothing. Not having > worked on this for years I had forgot how thankless this work is. Feel free to ignore anything I say. I don't have a real need for the project and just hang out here because I liked the "other" usability enhancements Eric threw into his rebuild (a working rpm-managed java back when Red Hat made that very difficult, webmin, acrobat reader, etc.) and it is sometime fun to answer sysadmin type questions from teachers. But, I don't see how any amount of contribution toward the fedora packaging effort could have changed the way things ended up. And in retrospect I see why the original version had to be a respin built to just come up working. Eric is a tough act to follow. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 12 02:18:52 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 21:18:52 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCB438C.3060002@gmail.com> On 5/11/11 6:18 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/11/2011 1:07 PM, Jim Kinney wrote: >> >> Monthly power bills are always bad with old crap running. But to add in >> getting new hardware (spend now + deploy in a few months) PLUS the bad >> power bills is just not an option for most schools right now. What they >> that does work is better than what they want that they can't afford to >> buy without laying off another round of teachers. >> >> So we have to find a way to keep that old crap running for them a while >> longer. So maybe a full release build that will run on i386, no upgraded >> flags, with a minimal X environment is feasible. Dunno. I've never >> compiled a full distro before. Maybe it' time I did. The k12ltsp EL5 version should still work for old hardware as long as it is all old hardware where ltsp4 works. CentOS 5 should have 3 more years of update support. > Reconfiguring and rebuilding all the necessary packages might make it 1000% > extra work, especially if you try to do so for package updates later, if you > want to take advantage of bug fixes and driver improvements to improve client > hardware support. This may be the infeasible part. Would it be more feasible to use DRBL as the PXE boot manager and custom-tune some small linux distro (like Puppy) that it could boot from an iso image? That would divorce the server/client builds completely and perhaps offer a way to run different versions on different clients. It wants to put the whole image in RAM on the client so it might be an exercise in trimming out all unneeded programs. On the plus side you might be able to build a USB or CD boot, NX client version of the same image that would be perfect for wifi clients without much extra effort. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From microman at cmosnetworks.com Thu May 12 03:16:27 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 23:16:27 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DCB510B.900@cmosnetworks.com> Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/11/2011 06:20 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > >> On 5/11/2011 12:15 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> >>> i686 is considered to be: >>> >>> * "Pentium Pro or later" >>> * "AMD K6 (but not all) or later" >>> * "Via C7" or later >>> * Geode LX, but not Geode GX >>> >> OK, Geode LX may not be supported either, likely due to the userspace >> libraries being built with certain compiler flags. >> >> Warren >> > > I guess my "lowly" Atom clients are screamers compared to some people's > old junk but can't those people with really ancient hardware just stick > with K12LTSP (LTSP4)? Anyone running K12Linux has already had to deal > with the lack of i586 support for a number of years now. > > Even if new clients were required to keep things running for another > seven years (is that really so bad?), it's literally a matter of $86 per > machine to get an 1.66 GHz Atom D410 and 1 GB DDR2 RAM from newegg.com. > Some searching could probably find some even cheaper options. > > Jeff > Frankly, K12LTSP 5EL is still doing the job for me. I have no real reason to upgrade, given my needs, and I doubt that most offices do, either. As Les Mikesell said, Eric Harrison is a tough act to follow. Warren, nobody in their right mind would blame you for not wanting to do this anymore. If you do, though, then you're a saint. --TP From rowens at ptd.net Thu May 12 11:52:49 2011 From: rowens at ptd.net (Rob Owens) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 07:52:49 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> Message-ID: <20110512115249.GA15630@aurora.owens.net> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 09:49:42PM -0400, Jeff Siddall wrote: > Even if new clients were required to keep things running for another > seven years (is that really so bad?), it's literally a matter of $86 per > machine to get an 1.66 GHz Atom D410 and 1 GB DDR2 RAM from newegg.com. > Some searching could probably find some even cheaper options. > Jeff, could you give me some part numbers or links at newegg? Or is this not including a case, power supply, etc? From rowens at ptd.net Thu May 12 12:01:00 2011 From: rowens at ptd.net (Rob Owens) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:01:00 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> Message-ID: <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> Warren has already recommended Debian as a viable alternative for folks on this list. I can understand wanting to stick with Fedora and CentOS if that's what you know best. How about this: Use Debian as the LTSP server that boots up your thin clients. Then, using the "next server" option in dhcpd.conf, get your GUI from a Fedora or CentOS server of your choice. (Assuming that functionality is still present in recent Fedora and CentOS). Or... Use VNC or something similar to connect from a stripped-down Debian thin client to a machine of your choice. Both of these solutions give you the easy management of LTSP, with the Fedora/CentOS/other user experience you might be looking for. These solutions only add one extra server to your system, and it can be a really, really low end system if all it's going to do is PXE boot your thin clients. Or you could just use Debian like Warren mentioned. I use it, and it works nicely. The LTSP package manager for Debian is easy to get in touch with on the ltsp-discuss mailing list. -Rob On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 02:50:37AM -1000, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi folks, > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at > k12linux.org, but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 > through 2009 Red Hat generously supported my time to work on this > project. In 2010 I've since left Red Hat in order to help my > parents with the family business and prepare for grad school. > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > ================= > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking > to base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's > work to make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 > and EL6 and they both use Upstart. > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For > this reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on > Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on > i586. I would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels > in those versions of Fedora. > > At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my > effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from > you the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past > years. That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low > hanging fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be > the end. > > (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be > willing to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if > interested.) > > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many > years of life. However, since the only maintainable way we can > build the client images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora > version, this effectively means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be > frozen forever in client hardware support. > > Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE > ============================= > Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora > 15+, but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect > continued support for LTSP in Fedora. > > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality > of remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat > engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire > Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working > remote X desktops as it simply was never a priority. > > * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast > majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the > non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly > supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP > would use. > > * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop > support for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't > already happened. > > * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more > years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like > KDE or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is > still a non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user > experience since remote X is poorly tested there as well. > > For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to > work on this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be > officially supported by Fedora. > > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > =================================================== > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol > SPICE and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. > > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop > running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized > servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk > when their client disconnects in order to conserve central server > resources. > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and > viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would > theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of > both Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although > K12Linux would only document the Linux case. > > SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first > generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful > enough to handle it. > > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've > only heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the > almost untested remote X functionality. > > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X > of LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail > in the coffin for the old LTSP model. > > This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a > smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer > developers. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From jim.kinney at gmail.com Thu May 12 12:20:04 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:20:04 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110512115249.GA15630@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> <20110512115249.GA15630@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: http://www.norhtec.com/products/index.html The MicroClient JrMx is outstanding at $150 They also have the Gecko laptop at $199 that just screams lightweight Linux school tool. When I was closing out after the APS project, the MicroClient Jr was what we were evaluating as a clear replacement for the HP stuff APS bought. On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 09:49:42PM -0400, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > Even if new clients were required to keep things running for another > > seven years (is that really so bad?), it's literally a matter of $86 per > > machine to get an 1.66 GHz Atom D410 and 1 GB DDR2 RAM from newegg.com. > > Some searching could probably find some even cheaper options. > > > Jeff, could you give me some part numbers or links at newegg? Or is > this not including a case, power supply, etc? > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jim.kinney at gmail.com Thu May 12 12:35:32 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:35:32 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: Rob, I don't see the issue being server support of pxe boot on CentOS (or RHEL or Fedora - cobbler is mainstreamed for all of these). The issue is the OS available for the thin clients to use that's provided by the server. The minimum hardware supported for Fedora is i686 so many really old i386 and alternative cpu systems are automatically off the list. However, Debian still supports all the way to the _real_ i386 system as well as other very slim distros (I've tinkered with tinycore - runs in 10M ram!). So the real work is to fix the servers so they support providing an non-server OS to the clients. Another issue I hit the wall on a while back was the (ab)use of flash in almost all edu web sites. Flash has not become a lighter weight tool either. So many teachers are wanting to use youtube and other flash video sites (heck, all multimedia) in the classroom and for large installations, that will bring a beefy server to it's knees when 30 clients fire up the same video. It just doesn't scale. So the solution that my team and I were moving towards was what we called a "chubby client". PXE boot OS and NFS mount a full root with all binaries (not the server OS by default). The system ran X local and thus all application ran local, especially firefox with flash. So a single overload would not bring down the server but just a single client. The big technical hurdle we hit was the need to limit the tab count for firefox (or at least a memory usage as there was no plan for swap space - that may change). On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > Warren has already recommended Debian as a viable alternative for folks > on this list. I can understand wanting to stick with Fedora and CentOS > if that's what you know best. How about this: > > Use Debian as the LTSP server that boots up your thin clients. Then, > using the "next server" option in dhcpd.conf, get your GUI from a Fedora > or CentOS server of your choice. (Assuming that functionality is still > present in recent Fedora and CentOS). Or... Use VNC or something similar > to > connect from a stripped-down Debian thin client to a machine of your > choice. > > Both of these solutions give you the easy management of LTSP, with the > Fedora/CentOS/other user experience you might be looking for. These > solutions only add one extra server to your system, and it can be a > really, really low end system if all it's going to do is PXE boot your > thin clients. > > Or you could just use Debian like Warren mentioned. I use it, and it > works nicely. The LTSP package manager for Debian is easy to get in > touch with on the ltsp-discuss mailing list. > > -Rob > > On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 02:50:37AM -1000, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at > > k12linux.org, but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 > > through 2009 Red Hat generously supported my time to work on this > > project. In 2010 I've since left Red Hat in order to help my > > parents with the family business and prepare for grad school. > > > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > > ================= > > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > > > Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking > > to base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's > > work to make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 > > and EL6 and they both use Upstart. > > > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For > > this reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on > > Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on > > i586. I would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels > > in those versions of Fedora. > > > > At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my > > effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from > > you the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past > > years. That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low > > hanging fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be > > the end. > > > > (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be > > willing to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if > > interested.) > > > > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many > > years of life. However, since the only maintainable way we can > > build the client images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora > > version, this effectively means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be > > frozen forever in client hardware support. > > > > Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE > > ============================= > > Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora > > 15+, but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect > > continued support for LTSP in Fedora. > > > > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality > > of remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat > > engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire > > Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working > > remote X desktops as it simply was never a priority. > > > > * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast > > majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the > > non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly > > supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP > > would use. > > > > * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop > > support for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't > > already happened. > > > > * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more > > years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like > > KDE or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is > > still a non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user > > experience since remote X is poorly tested there as well. > > > > For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to > > work on this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be > > officially supported by Fedora. > > > > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > > =================================================== > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol > > SPICE and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. > > > > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop > > running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized > > servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk > > when their client disconnects in order to conserve central server > > resources. > > > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and > > viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would > > theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of > > both Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although > > K12Linux would only document the Linux case. > > > > SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first > > generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful > > enough to handle it. > > > > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've > > only heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the > > almost untested remote X functionality. > > > > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X > > of LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail > > in the coffin for the old LTSP model. > > > > This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a > > smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer > > developers. > > > > Warren Togami > > warren at togami.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > K12OSN mailing list > > K12OSN at redhat.com > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > > For more info see > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Thu May 12 12:44:53 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 02:44:53 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB438C.3060002@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> <4DCB438C.3060002@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DCBD645.5070705@togami.com> On 5/11/2011 4:18 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Would it be more feasible to use DRBL as the PXE boot manager and > custom-tune some small linux distro (like Puppy) that it could boot from > an iso image? That would divorce the server/client builds completely and > perhaps offer a way to run different versions on different clients. It > wants to put the whole image in RAM on the client so it might be an > exercise in trimming out all unneeded programs. On the plus side you > might be able to build a USB or CD boot, NX client version of the same > image that would be perfect for wifi clients without much extra effort. > A Debian-based chroot for /opt/ltsp/i386 would likely be the easiest to deploy as the client OS. It would be minimal additional work. I suppose I'll make a i686 EL6 /opt/ltsp/i386 the standard, and you can optionally download a tarball containing the same thing but from Debian if you need to support old hardware. Warren From warren at togami.com Thu May 12 12:49:04 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 02:49:04 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <4DCBD740.2060004@togami.com> On 5/12/2011 2:01 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > Warren has already recommended Debian as a viable alternative for folks > on this list. I can understand wanting to stick with Fedora and CentOS > if that's what you know best. How about this: > > Use Debian as the LTSP server that boots up your thin clients. Then, > using the "next server" option in dhcpd.conf, get your GUI from a Fedora > or CentOS server of your choice. (Assuming that functionality is still > present in recent Fedora and CentOS). Or... Use VNC or something similar to > connect from a stripped-down Debian thin client to a machine of your > choice. > > Both of these solutions give you the easy management of LTSP, with the > Fedora/CentOS/other user experience you might be looking for. These > solutions only add one extra server to your system, and it can be a > really, really low end system if all it's going to do is PXE boot your > thin clients. > > Or you could just use Debian like Warren mentioned. I use it, and it > works nicely. The LTSP package manager for Debian is easy to get in > touch with on the ltsp-discuss mailing list. I'm going to experiment with the opposite of this: EL6 LTSP server with Debian /opt/ltsp/i386. Warren From news at siddall.name Thu May 12 13:23:32 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:23:32 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCBD740.2060004@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <4DCBD740.2060004@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCBDF54.401@siddall.name> On 05/12/2011 08:49 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > I'm going to experiment with the opposite of this: EL6 LTSP server with > Debian /opt/ltsp/i386. That sounds like a good alternative. The Debian chroot could even be built in a Debian VM running on the EL6 server itself (ie: no requirement for a dedicated machine just to build client images). People who have i686 hardware can use it a pure EL6 LTSP chroot, and older hardware chroots can be created easily made in a VM. Jeff From news at siddall.name Thu May 12 13:40:25 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:40:25 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110512115249.GA15630@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB0BC5.9050207@togami.com> <4DCB3CB6.5010704@siddall.name> <20110512115249.GA15630@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <4DCBE349.7040707@siddall.name> On 05/12/2011 07:52 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 09:49:42PM -0400, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> Even if new clients were required to keep things running for another >> seven years (is that really so bad?), it's literally a matter of $86 per >> machine to get an 1.66 GHz Atom D410 and 1 GB DDR2 RAM from newegg.com. >> Some searching could probably find some even cheaper options. >> > Jeff, could you give me some part numbers or links at newegg? Or is > this not including a case, power supply, etc? $86 is just the MB/CPU/RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121398&cm_re=D410PT-_-13-121-398-_-Product http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134216 The existing case/PS/monitor/keyboard/mouse would need to be reused. If a new small case/PS/MB/CPU/RAM combo is required then this might work (just add memory from newegg above): http://www.logicsupply.com/products/bp_3500_nm1 A complete thin client for $94 is a really amazing price, but I don't know how well a ZOTAC NM10 works as a Linux client. Jeff From cfiaime at cfiaime.com Thu May 12 14:26:54 2011 From: cfiaime at cfiaime.com (Jeffrey Williams) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:26:54 -0600 Subject: [K12OSN] Support for LTSP on CentOS 6 Message-ID: <1305210414.4dcbee2e7348a@webmail.no-ip.com> Good morning, Not being a software developer but more of a system integrator, I am willing to do documentation. The big problem, how does one get in the loop for such work? jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com From gspurgeon at dageek.co.uk Thu May 12 15:36:53 2011 From: gspurgeon at dageek.co.uk (Gavin Spurgeon) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 16:36:53 +0100 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/05/2011 23:15, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/9/2011 4:19 AM, Jeff Siddall wrote: >> On 05/08/2011 08:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at k12linux.org, >>> but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 through 2009 Red Hat >>> generously supported my time to work on this project. In 2010 I've >>> since left Red Hat in order to help my parents with the family business >>> and prepare for grad school. >>> >>> K12Linux LTSP EL6 >>> ================= >>> I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. >> >> Thanks Warren, I am eagerly awaiting this as a long term migration >> platform for my current K12Linux systems. > > I am reconsidering the worth of working on this project. This has not > been much of a positive response. In fact most of the response has been > only bitching from people who want everything but are willing to > contribute nothing. Not having worked on this for years I had forgot > how thankless this work is. > > I may consider releasing it only if enough people are willing to donate > to make this thankless grief worthwhile. The work that I did to make the packages work on F13 was minimal, All I did was to take to current upstream code and package it with some very very small changes to one or 2 txt conf files. I am sure that I/we/others could do the same with the current upstream code on F14, F15 or even EL6/CentOS/SL6. I have a week of down time from my day-2-day job coming very soon, so would have no issue trying get a very basic current upstream version built and packaged (.rpm) ready for people to test, I had loads of people contact me about testing the .rpm's I built for F13 and loads of feedback for users who did play with the packages on both F13 & F14. I was in the process of trying to work out how on earth to get my .spec files uploaded to the Fedora Build system so that KoJi could auto built them, but never worked it out in the end. @ Warren, If you could help by pointing me to some instructions on how you got LTSP in there in the 1st place, I could then move thing forward a little bit more with the new builds if needs be and try to get the ball rolling again. When it comes to your comment about "how thankless this work is" Your time @ Red Hat should have made you well used to that by now ;-) I also know that not a lot of people are on this mailing list that use the LTSP packages on Fedora anyway, I was talking to a lot of people over on the #ltsp irc channel that had no idea this mailing list even exists or that K12LTSP for that matter, they just know LTSP and do 'yum install ltsp' on Fedora. They have now be educated :-) - -- Gavin Spurgeon. AKA Da Geek - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The happiest of people don't necessarily have the best of everything, they just make the most of everything that comes along their way.." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.12 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3L/pQACgkQvp6arS3vDiq4egCgs1evPDNsPzCFcIHLmlb07miw HZsAn24g8yHZsw8jqqJYWpxIOc9uPMtq =+uiS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- This message was scanned by DaGeek Spam Filter and is believed to be clean. From lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu May 12 16:35:50 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:35:50 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCBD645.5070705@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCB1952.5010203@togami.com> <4DCB438C.3060002@gmail.com> <4DCBD645.5070705@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DCC0C66.80503@gmail.com> On 5/12/2011 7:44 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/11/2011 4:18 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> >> Would it be more feasible to use DRBL as the PXE boot manager and >> custom-tune some small linux distro (like Puppy) that it could boot from >> an iso image? That would divorce the server/client builds completely and >> perhaps offer a way to run different versions on different clients. It >> wants to put the whole image in RAM on the client so it might be an >> exercise in trimming out all unneeded programs. On the plus side you >> might be able to build a USB or CD boot, NX client version of the same >> image that would be perfect for wifi clients without much extra effort. >> > > A Debian-based chroot for /opt/ltsp/i386 would likely be the easiest to > deploy as the client OS. It would be minimal additional work. > > I suppose I'll make a i686 EL6 /opt/ltsp/i386 the standard, and you can > optionally download a tarball containing the same thing but from Debian > if you need to support old hardware. Could this possibly be done as a script that scarfs the needed items from a debian or ubuntu livecd or iso file (with or without wrapping it as an intermediate rpm)? The idea would be to minimize the repeated work as the alternate distro updates and to offer a choice of debian for anyone who cares about including non-free firmware or ubuntu for devices that need it. The differences come up once in a while regarding clonezilla-live and are likely to affect thin clients too. Or even better, let multiple client roots exist if it's not too much trouble to control the default. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From jan at recreatie-zorg.nl Fri May 13 14:06:45 2011 From: jan at recreatie-zorg.nl (Jan Middelkoop) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:06:45 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> Message-ID: <4DCD3AF5.2070600@recreatie-zorg.nl> Dear list, Gavin attended me to this mailing list in #ltsp. I didn't know of it's existance before. For the past few days I've been eargerly following the discussion going on here about the future of LTSP in RHEL and (more importantly, to me) Fedora. Eagerly, because I've recently deployed Fedora-powered LTSP terminal server and clients in our company and I would be very, very sad if it were discontinued so soon. It's more than that though. I also firmly believe that a project like LTSP is a wonderful piece of software and deserves to be a part of Fedora. For lack of knowledge I cannot join in on the debate about if LTSP and remote X is technically a good solution and if there couldn't be better ones. I do however think it seems premature to drop LTSP support in Fedora. I don't think Fedora currently contains a piece of software that provides the same ease of use and functionality as LTSP (correct me if I'm wrong). I believe LTSP brings unique functionality to Fedora. One thing I haven't heard an alternative for in the debate going on now, is running applications locally on the clients, yet integrating them nicely into the desktop environment. Something LTSP does, with remote X. This functionality is vital for our company. We use VoIP softphones for our telephony needs. When I run a softphone on the LTSP server, it simply doesn't work flawless (I've tried most, if not all). There are too many problems with the audio. When I run the softphone locally on the clients (cutting out the middle man), most work flawless. I cannot see softphones performing well in a virtualized environment. I am not one to stand in the way of forward thinking and/or new technological endeavours. I think the idea put forth by Warren could have merit. I think running every client inside a virtualized environment will use a lot of extra resources, but this should not be a problem with the next generation of hardware. However I don't believe we are there yet. I think LTSP is still a great solution for creating centralized management and centralized resources for all client computers in a company. I would also like to give a short response to Warren's point about the lack of people who contribute to this project. I try to spend around ten hours per week supporting open source development, in one way or another. I have written documentation, translated packages to Dutch (including LDM at one point), submitted bugs and bugfixes, and yet... somehow I've never gotten involved with K12Linux. Why? Because K12Linux seems distanced from Fedora. In fact, for a long time I've had the impression that K12Linux was a Linux distribution by itself, having LTSP readily configured for Fedora. As I have no interest in that, and just want LTSP in regular Fedora, I've never gotten involved. I think this project could be presented better and explained better to Fedora LTSP users. This could lead to more people getting involved. As another example I would like to point out that Gavin has had working RPM's of a recent LTSP version for Fedora 13 and Fedora 14 for over half a year now. They've been tested by many people and the results were very promising. Yet they still aren't distributed with those Fedora releases. Why? These seem like the contributions from the community you have been looking for, and they're left 'out in the rain', so to speak. These are my $0,02 on the whole situation. I really hope Gavin will find the time and inspiration to continue building LTSP for Fedora, and that he will be supported by everyone in doing so. I know I will support LTSP under Fedora in any way that I can. Kindest regards, Jan Middelkoop Op 12-5-2011 17:36, Gavin Spurgeon schreef: > The work that I did to make the packages work on F13 was minimal, All I > did was to take to current upstream code and package it with some very > very small changes to one or 2 txt conf files. > > I am sure that I/we/others could do the same with the current upstream > code on F14, F15 or even EL6/CentOS/SL6. > > I have a week of down time from my day-2-day job coming very soon, so > would have no issue trying get a very basic current upstream version > built and packaged (.rpm) ready for people to test, I had loads of > people contact me about testing the .rpm's I built for F13 and loads of > feedback for users who did play with the packages on both F13& F14. > > I was in the process of trying to work out how on earth to get my .spec > files uploaded to the Fedora Build system so that KoJi could auto built > them, but never worked it out in the end. > > @ Warren, If you could help by pointing me to some instructions on how > you got LTSP in there in the 1st place, I could then move thing forward > a little bit more with the new builds if needs be and try to get the > ball rolling again. > > When it comes to your comment about "how thankless this work is" Your > time @ Red Hat should have made you well used to that by now ;-) > > I also know that not a lot of people are on this mailing list that use > the LTSP packages on Fedora anyway, I was talking to a lot of people > over on the #ltsp irc channel that had no idea this mailing list even > exists or that K12LTSP for that matter, they just know LTSP and do 'yum > install ltsp' on Fedora. > > They have now be educated :-) > > - -- > > Gavin Spurgeon. > AKA Da Geek From lesmikesell at gmail.com Fri May 13 16:04:12 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:04:12 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> Message-ID: <4DCD567C.1060006@gmail.com> On 5/12/2011 10:36 AM, Gavin Spurgeon wrote: > > The work that I did to make the packages work on F13 was minimal, All I > did was to take to current upstream code and package it with some very > very small changes to one or 2 txt conf files. > > I am sure that I/we/others could do the same with the current upstream > code on F14, F15 or even EL6/CentOS/SL6. Can you get it into the EPEL repository for RHEL/SL/Centos? And is there a solution for older client hardware that current Fedora and RHEL no longer support? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From lesmikesell at gmail.com Fri May 13 16:10:50 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:10:50 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCD3AF5.2070600@recreatie-zorg.nl> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> <4DCD3AF5.2070600@recreatie-zorg.nl> Message-ID: <4DCD580A.9040003@gmail.com> On 5/13/2011 9:06 AM, Jan Middelkoop wrote: > Dear list, > > Gavin attended me to this mailing list in #ltsp. I didn't know of it's > existance before. For the past few days I've been eargerly following the > discussion going on here about the future of LTSP in RHEL and (more > importantly, to me) Fedora. There are very big differences in use cases between RHEL and Fedora. Fedora changes very quickly and to keep up you you have to reinstall frequently. Some people like that, but I'd rather spend my life doing something other than re-installs. working around new bugs, and finding my hardware is no longer supported. > Eagerly, because I've recently deployed Fedora-powered LTSP terminal > server and clients in our company and I would be very, very sad if it > were discontinued so soon. It's more than that though. I also firmly > believe that a project like LTSP is a wonderful piece of software and > deserves to be a part of Fedora. If you don't mind not having all of this week's features in Fedora, you can use the K12LTSP EL5 distribution. This is a respin of Centos 5.x which will have update support for 3 more years. It uses LTSP 4, though, which supports older hardware as terminals. > For lack of knowledge I cannot join in on the debate about if LTSP and > remote X is technically a good solution and if there couldn't be better > ones. You can use remote X technology a slightly different way by running the desktop and some applications locally. Where audio and video are involved, this is probably a better direction but authentication and mapping remote resources are issues that don't have standard solutions. > I do however think it seems premature to drop LTSP support in > Fedora. I don't think Fedora currently contains a piece of software that > provides the same ease of use and functionality as LTSP (correct me if > I'm wrong). Basically anything running X can run anything remotely, including the window manager and desktop environment. For example you can boot a livecd version of about any linux without starting X, then start it with "X -query remote-host" and if the remote host is configured to accept remote logins, you get a GUI login prompt, followed by the display of the remote desktop. LTSP is just a wrapper to network-boot machines into that state. > I believe LTSP brings unique functionality to Fedora. One thing I > haven't heard an alternative for in the debate going on now, is running > applications locally on the clients, yet integrating them nicely into > the desktop environment. If the desktop hardware is really a PC capable of running its own OS, you can run any version of X there to get the remote desktop or the NX client from www.nomachine.com which works the same but has better remote performance and works with freenx or their commercial server. Personally, I use a 2-headed windows box with an NX session to a linux server on one, local apps on the other, but there is intentionally no integration other than being able to cut/paste text between the windows. > Something LTSP does, with remote X. This > functionality is vital for our company. We use VoIP softphones for our > telephony needs. When I run a softphone on the LTSP server, it simply > doesn't work flawless (I've tried most, if not all). There are too many > problems with the audio. When I run the softphone locally on the clients > (cutting out the middle man), most work flawless. I cannot see > softphones performing well in a virtualized environment. That's why I prefer to expose the difference between local and remote apps. If I ran linux locally I'd be able to make the apps appear seamlessly in windows in the same window manager, but I don't quite see the point. I have always been surprised that there wasn't a good X-oriented application menu concept to merge program launchers among local and remote hosts, though. If there is such a thing, I've missed it. > I try to spend around ten hours per week supporting open source > development, in one way or another. I have written documentation, > translated packages to Dutch (including LDM at one point), submitted > bugs and bugfixes, and yet... somehow I've never gotten involved with > K12Linux. Why? Because K12Linux seems distanced from Fedora. In fact, > for a long time I've had the impression that K12Linux was a Linux > distribution by itself, having LTSP readily configured for Fedora. K12LTSP _was_ a respin, originally both in fedora and centos versions, but eventually I think everyone gets tired of dealing with churn and instability in fedora. It was designed to come up working with no special technical expertise if you used a typical 2-nic configuration. K12Linux was supposed to be the replacement based on separately packaged applications but without a stable OS distribution it doesn't have the same traction. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From rowens at ptd.net Fri May 13 16:50:09 2011 From: rowens at ptd.net (Rob Owens) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:50:09 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as Fedora supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? -Rob On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 08:35:32AM -0400, Jim Kinney wrote: > Rob, > > I don't see the issue being server support of pxe boot on CentOS (or RHEL or > Fedora - cobbler is mainstreamed for all of these). The issue is the OS > available for the thin clients to use that's provided by the server. The > minimum hardware supported for Fedora is i686 so many really old i386 and > alternative cpu systems are automatically off the list. > > However, Debian still supports all the way to the _real_ i386 system as well > as other very slim distros (I've tinkered with tinycore - runs in 10M ram!). > > So the real work is to fix the servers so they support providing an > non-server OS to the clients. > > Another issue I hit the wall on a while back was the (ab)use of flash in > almost all edu web sites. Flash has not become a lighter weight tool either. > So many teachers are wanting to use youtube and other flash video sites > (heck, all multimedia) in the classroom and for large installations, that > will bring a beefy server to it's knees when 30 clients fire up the same > video. It just doesn't scale. > > So the solution that my team and I were moving towards was what we called a > "chubby client". PXE boot OS and NFS mount a full root with all binaries > (not the server OS by default). The system ran X local and thus all > application ran local, especially firefox with flash. So a single overload > would not bring down the server but just a single client. The big technical > hurdle we hit was the need to limit the tab count for firefox (or at least a > memory usage as there was no plan for swap space - that may change). > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > > > Warren has already recommended Debian as a viable alternative for folks > > on this list. I can understand wanting to stick with Fedora and CentOS > > if that's what you know best. How about this: > > > > Use Debian as the LTSP server that boots up your thin clients. Then, > > using the "next server" option in dhcpd.conf, get your GUI from a Fedora > > or CentOS server of your choice. (Assuming that functionality is still > > present in recent Fedora and CentOS). Or... Use VNC or something similar > > to > > connect from a stripped-down Debian thin client to a machine of your > > choice. > > > > Both of these solutions give you the easy management of LTSP, with the > > Fedora/CentOS/other user experience you might be looking for. These > > solutions only add one extra server to your system, and it can be a > > really, really low end system if all it's going to do is PXE boot your > > thin clients. > > > > Or you could just use Debian like Warren mentioned. I use it, and it > > works nicely. The LTSP package manager for Debian is easy to get in > > touch with on the ltsp-discuss mailing list. > > > > -Rob > > > > On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 02:50:37AM -1000, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > It has been a LONG while since I've been able to look at > > > k12linux.org, but I haven't forgotten about this project. 2007 > > > through 2009 Red Hat generously supported my time to work on this > > > project. In 2010 I've since left Red Hat in order to help my > > > parents with the family business and prepare for grad school. > > > > > > K12Linux LTSP EL6 > > > ================= > > > I soon plan on working on a version of LTSP based on EL6. > > > > > > Since CentOS *still* hasn't released their EL6 clone, I am thinking > > > to base it on SL6. I suspect it wont be much work to adapt Gavin's > > > work to make a EL6 based K12Linux since not much changed between F13 > > > and EL6 and they both use Upstart. > > > > > > BIGGEST PROBLEM: 32bit EL6 supports a minimum of i686 and they have > > > excluded certain kernel modules required by LTSP like nbd.ko. For > > > this reason, we may need clients of EL6 to boot images based on > > > Fedora 12/13?/14? that still have userspace capable of running on > > > i586. I would need to see what are the supported archs and kernels > > > in those versions of Fedora. > > > > > > At the moment I suspect this might be doable with about a week of my > > > effort. I've entirely given up on expecting development help from > > > you the community after I've asked in vain from you folks these past > > > years. That's OK. I will try. But I am only able to pick the low > > > hanging fruit. If I cannot quickly make it work, then this will be > > > the end. > > > > > > (If someone is willing to financially sponsor my time, I may be > > > willing to put more effort into this. Contact me privately if > > > interested.) > > > > > > The LTSP based on EL6 would likely be the LAST version of LTSP for a > > > RH-derived distribution. Given the LONG lifespan of EL6 this should > > > give the considerable numbers of existing LTSP deployments many > > > years of life. However, since the only maintainable way we can > > > build the client images for EL6 is from a particular old Fedora > > > version, this effectively means that K12Linux LTSP EL6 will be > > > frozen forever in client hardware support. > > > > > > Fedora 15+? LTSP IS OBSOLETE > > > ============================= > > > Theoretically LTSP upstream could be adapted to work with Fedora > > > 15+, but for a number of reasons it has become impractical to expect > > > continued support for LTSP in Fedora. > > > > > > * LTSP relies on the ancient and almost now untested functionality > > > of remote X. Fedora 8 through 12 I was effectively the only Red Hat > > > engineer working on remote X desktop and netboot issues. The entire > > > Fedora distro will continue to further drift away from working > > > remote X desktops as it simply was never a priority. > > > > > > * Fedora 15+'s GNOME 3 will be totally incompatible with the vast > > > majority of LTSP client hardware incapable of compositing, while the > > > non-composited fallback is likely to be poorly tested and poorly > > > supported, especially in the remote X case which nobody but LTSP > > > would use. > > > > > > * As Fedora progresses, its 32bit kernel and userspace will drop > > > support for the majority of LTSP client hardware, if it hasn't > > > already happened. > > > > > > * A possible way to keep Fedora LTSP somewhat working for a few more > > > years might be to switch the default desktop to something else like > > > KDE or XFCE that relies on just plain non-composited X. But that is > > > still a non-trivial amount of effort to make it a smooth user > > > experience since remote X is poorly tested there as well. > > > > > > For these reasons, and the fact that I am no longer sponsored to > > > work on this, it seems unlikely that LTSP will ever again be > > > officially supported by Fedora. > > > > > > Next Generation of K12Linux: Desktop Virtualization > > > =================================================== > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_virtualization > > > I have been thinking about a theoretical next generation technology > > > replacement for LTSP. Fedora contains the remote desktop protocol > > > SPICE and kvm, the Open Source core components of a VDI solution. > > > > > > A theoretical K12Linux based on SPICE would have each user's desktop > > > running within their own virtual machine on a pool of centralized > > > servers. Maybe each user's desktop VM would be hibernated to disk > > > when their client disconnects in order to conserve central server > > > resources. > > > > > > The desktop GUI and sound would be forwarded over the network and > > > viewable with the SPICE client running on thin clients. This would > > > theoretically allow K12Linux deployments to connect to any mix of > > > both Windows or Linux virtualized desktop machines, although > > > K12Linux would only document the Linux case. > > > > > > SPICE requires much beefier client hardware. It appears that first > > > generation Intel Atom with i950 video is only borderline powerful > > > enough to handle it. > > > > > > I suspect that SPICE will never support compositing. So a VDI-based > > > Fedora 15+ would be using the non-compositing fallback (which I've > > > only heard about but never tried). At least it wont rely on the > > > almost untested remote X functionality. > > > > > > Youtube sucks much less over the SPICE protocol than with remote X > > > of LTSP. Modern expectations of stuff like video are another nail > > > in the coffin for the old LTSP model. > > > > > > This is all very theoretical. The problems involved to make this a > > > smooth user experience may make this plan infeasible for volunteer > > > developers. > > > > > > Warren Togami > > > warren at togami.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > K12OSN mailing list > > > K12OSN at redhat.com > > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > > > For more info see > > > > _______________________________________________ > > K12OSN mailing list > > K12OSN at redhat.com > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > > For more info see > > > > > > -- > -- > James P. Kinney III > > As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to > consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they > please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. > - *2011 Noam Chomsky* > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From rowens at ptd.net Fri May 13 16:57:16 2011 From: rowens at ptd.net (Rob Owens) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:57:16 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <20110513165716.GB27398@aurora.owens.net> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:50:09PM -0400, Rob Owens wrote: > I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you > specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP > Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as Fedora > supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen > script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. > There's also this, which looks interesting (especially since NoMachine stopped releasing code under a Free license). http://www.x2go.org -Rob From lesmikesell at gmail.com Fri May 13 17:22:23 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:22:23 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> On 5/13/2011 11:50 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you > specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP > Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as Fedora > supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen > script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. > > But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a > Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you > just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? You need this step to be able to find the debian kernel (etc.) to include, then save the results where the fedora/RHEL (etc.) host can use it as the boot image and nfs export to the client. I think there should be some way to use a foreign-OS liveCD or image as the source so you could update without needing a fully installed copy, but don't know exactly what LTSP5 needs there. If it includes everything the client side executes, you'd be able to run a 64-bit host OS and support 32-bit clients. Maybe if the debian/ubuntu/fedora packager were the same, the client chroot could be packaged individually and the debian/ubuntu flavors included for fedora, but you need some sort of update plan to handle security fixes, support for new hardware, etc. It would also be handy to have a USB-boot version of the same thing plus a similar version that loads an NX client to use in situations where PXE booting doesn't work and/or you have limited bandwidth. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From rowens at ptd.net Fri May 13 19:53:37 2011 From: rowens at ptd.net (Rob Owens) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 15:53:37 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20110513195337.GB28364@aurora.owens.net> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:22:23PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/13/2011 11:50 AM, Rob Owens wrote: > >I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you > >specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP > >Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as Fedora > >supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen > >script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. > > > >But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a > >Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you > >just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? > > You need this step to be able to find the debian kernel (etc.) to > include, then save the results where the fedora/RHEL (etc.) host can > use it as the boot image and nfs export to the client. I think > there should be some way to use a foreign-OS liveCD or image as the > source so you could update without needing a fully installed copy, > but don't know exactly what LTSP5 needs there. If it includes > everything the client side executes, you'd be able to run a 64-bit > host OS and support 32-bit clients. Maybe if the > debian/ubuntu/fedora packager were the same, the client chroot could > be packaged individually and the debian/ubuntu flavors included for > fedora, but you need some sort of update plan to handle security > fixes, support for new hardware, etc. > > It would also be handy to have a USB-boot version of the same thing > plus a similar version that loads an NX client to use in situations > where PXE booting doesn't work and/or you have limited bandwidth. > I don't think you'd need a liveCD or anything (unless I'm misunderstanding your intent). The way it works on Debian is the chroot gets built from debs that come from the Debian repository. It can be done with just an internet connection. Assuming you can get the gpg trust thing worked out, a "yum install ltsp" could grab the debs it needs from the Debian repository and construct the chroot. It could be as simple as importing the Debian keyring into the keyring of "root" on the Fedora system. I think that keyring is located in the Debian package "debian-archive-keyring". I'm not sure if the Debian keyring even needs to be known by the Fedora system, or if it only needs to be known in the chroot. -Rob From lesmikesell at gmail.com Fri May 13 20:24:29 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 15:24:29 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <20110513195337.GB28364@aurora.owens.net> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> <20110513195337.GB28364@aurora.owens.net> Message-ID: <4DCD937D.60500@gmail.com> On 5/13/2011 2:53 PM, Rob Owens wrote: > >> > I don't think you'd need a liveCD or anything (unless I'm > misunderstanding your intent). The way it works on Debian is the chroot > gets built from debs that come from the Debian repository. It can be > done with just an internet connection. If all the contents of the chroot and kernel are included as opposed to a script that builds it from the host versions of the files, that would work fine. > Assuming you can get the gpg trust thing worked out, a "yum install > ltsp" could grab the debs it needs from the Debian repository and > construct the chroot. It could be as simple as importing the Debian > keyring into the keyring of "root" on the Fedora system. I think that > keyring is located in the Debian package "debian-archive-keyring". I'm > not sure if the Debian keyring even needs to be known by the Fedora > system, or if it only needs to be known in the chroot. I don't know much about the debian way of packaging. It is different enough that yum isn't going to do it natively, but there are tools to extract the contents or convert to other formats (alien?). -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From warren at togami.com Mon May 16 07:28:44 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 21:28:44 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCD567C.1060006@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> <4DCD567C.1060006@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DD0D22C.9020909@togami.com> On 5/13/2011 6:04 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/12/2011 10:36 AM, Gavin Spurgeon wrote: >> >> The work that I did to make the packages work on F13 was minimal, All I >> did was to take to current upstream code and package it with some very >> very small changes to one or 2 txt conf files. >> >> I am sure that I/we/others could do the same with the current upstream >> code on F14, F15 or even EL6/CentOS/SL6. > > Can you get it into the EPEL repository for RHEL/SL/Centos? And is there > a solution for older client hardware that current Fedora and RHEL no > longer support? > No. There is no solution to that problem that Fedora or EPEL would accept. Warren From warren at togami.com Mon May 16 07:31:04 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 21:31:04 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DD0D2B8.7050307@togami.com> On 5/13/2011 7:22 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/13/2011 11:50 AM, Rob Owens wrote: >> I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you >> specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP >> Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as >> Fedora >> supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen >> script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. >> >> But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a >> Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you >> just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? > > You need this step to be able to find the debian kernel (etc.) to > include, then save the results where the fedora/RHEL (etc.) host can use > it as the boot image and nfs export to the client. I think there should > be some way to use a foreign-OS liveCD or image as the source so you > could update without needing a fully installed copy, but don't know > exactly what LTSP5 needs there. If it includes everything the client > side executes, you'd be able to run a 64-bit host OS and support 32-bit > clients. Maybe if the debian/ubuntu/fedora packager were the same, the > client chroot could be packaged individually and the debian/ubuntu > flavors included for fedora, but you need some sort of update plan to > handle security fixes, support for new hardware, etc. Any machine that can handle the extra overhead (mainly memory) of running a foreign LiveCD wouldn't have the problem of being unsupported by an EL6-based /opt/ltsp/i386. So this isn't a viable solution. Warren From warren at togami.com Mon May 16 07:32:27 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 21:32:27 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4DD0D30B.7050600@togami.com> On 5/13/2011 7:22 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 5/13/2011 11:50 AM, Rob Owens wrote: >> I made a mistake. "next server" in dhcpd.conf is not correct. If you >> specify "SERVER=somefedoraserver" in lts.conf on a separate LTSP >> Debian box, you could provide a remote Fedora experience as long as >> Fedora >> supports remote X. If remote X is not supported, then maybe a screen >> script could be made for VNC, NX, or something similar. >> >> But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a >> Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you >> just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? > > You need this step to be able to find the debian kernel (etc.) to > include, then save the results where the fedora/RHEL (etc.) host can use > it as the boot image and nfs export to the client. That's trivial. The existing scripts in ltsp-server might already do the job with a Debian-based chroot. Some minor changes would be necessary to make it a smooth experience. Warren From francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr Mon May 16 08:56:41 2011 From: francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois_Patte?=) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 10:56:41 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] unmounting an usb drive with ltsp Message-ID: <4DD0E6C9.5040402@mi.parisdescartes.fr> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bonjour, I have a thin client and I can mount without any problem an usb drive and access it. 2 questions: 1- When I want to unmount it, permission is not granted to a normal user ("you need to be root to do that" is the answer). How can I change this. 2- An icon is also displayed on the server, is it possible to avoid this. Thanks for any answer. - -- Fran?ois Patte UFR de math?matiques et informatique Universit? Paris Descartes T?l. +33 (0)1 8394 5849 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3Q5skACgkQdE6C2dhV2JWpfACeKDwzLmdmwsiwXV0lDqY9qXK3 ND0AnA5PR7JkvLaAhvylBr5ZPq+6AH7d =wmxB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cisna-barry at wc235.k12.il.us Mon May 16 11:06:20 2011 From: cisna-barry at wc235.k12.il.us (Barry Cisna) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 06:06:20 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] unmounting an usb drive with ltsp Message-ID: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Francois, What distribution of K12LTSP are you using? 32-bit,64-bit? Any usb stick that is inserted should be auto mounted, auto unmounted(once pulled out) into a thin client machine. Have you done an yum update after installing the original OS? Have you tried multiple thin clients and different usb sticks to have a comparison against name brands yet? This should work transparently without any user intervention. Barry From gianugo.altieri at gmail.com Mon May 16 11:23:05 2011 From: gianugo.altieri at gmail.com (Gianugo Altieri) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 13:23:05 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] unmounting an usb drive with ltsp In-Reply-To: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> References: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: <4DD10919.7000103@gmail.com> On 05/16/2011 01:06 PM, Barry Cisna wrote: > Francois, > > What distribution of K12LTSP are you using? 32-bit,64-bit? > Any usb stick that is inserted should be auto mounted, auto > unmounted(once pulled out) into a thin client machine. > Have you done an yum update after installing the original OS? > Have you tried multiple thin clients and different usb sticks to have a > comparison against name brands yet? > This should work transparently without any user intervention. > > Barry > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see Dear All, exactly the same thing described by Francois happens with us too. When we transfer stuff onto the USB sticks, it takes some time to write, and, of course, we wait, but there is no indication when process is over and there is no viable procedure to safely pull the stick off. The result is that many times data on the stick appear corrupt and unreadable when transferred onto other machines. Our configuration is K12linux on F12, 32bit and we use sticks from Kingston and Transcend. Best Gianugo Altieri Micro Bio Devices Italy From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 16 13:07:27 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 08:07:27 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DD0D2B8.7050307@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <20110512120100.GB15630@aurora.owens.net> <20110513165009.GA27398@aurora.owens.net> <4DCD68CF.6000900@gmail.com> <4DD0D2B8.7050307@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD1218F.7040906@gmail.com> On 5/16/11 2:31 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > >>> But I think Warren's suggestions of simply making a Debian chroot on a >>> Fedora/RHEL/CentOS machine makes more sense. Am I wrong, or would you >>> just need to get Debian's ltsp-build-client to work on Fedora/RHEL? >> >> You need this step to be able to find the debian kernel (etc.) to >> include, then save the results where the fedora/RHEL (etc.) host can use >> it as the boot image and nfs export to the client. I think there should >> be some way to use a foreign-OS liveCD or image as the source so you >> could update without needing a fully installed copy, but don't know >> exactly what LTSP5 needs there. If it includes everything the client >> side executes, you'd be able to run a 64-bit host OS and support 32-bit >> clients. Maybe if the debian/ubuntu/fedora packager were the same, the >> client chroot could be packaged individually and the debian/ubuntu >> flavors included for fedora, but you need some sort of update plan to >> handle security fixes, support for new hardware, etc. > > Any machine that can handle the extra overhead (mainly memory) of running a > foreign LiveCD wouldn't have the problem of being unsupported by an EL6-based > /opt/ltsp/i386. So this isn't a viable solution. I didn't mean to run the livecd on the client - or at least every client. I meant to use it as the source of the kernel and the contents of files in the chroot area by running a script on the server. I suppose you could also do it client-side by using a suitable PC for the job - not necessarily one of the usual thin clients. Once the files are extracted, they could be packaged/redistributed if the license of the source distribution permits and the hosting repository wants them but those are big ifs. Pulling them from directly from the alternate distribution's iso avoids those issues and lets the end user choose between debian and ubuntu (and maybe others) depending on which supports your hardware better. I don't know enough about ltsp5 to know if it is supposed to have enough of the system in the chroot to be able to do updates from its distribution from a client, but this approach would avoid the need for that by repeating the process as new isos are available and would let you completely replace the client base distro with one that isn't a direct update. An alternative might be to use a distro built for easy remastering like puppy and maintain your own client-optimized version for the chroot (perhaps with usb/cd versions as well) but that seems like extra work that would have to be repeated over the life of the server - but perhaps with some advantages. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr Mon May 16 21:30:06 2011 From: francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois_Patte?=) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 23:30:06 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] unmounting an usb drive with ltsp In-Reply-To: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> References: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: <4DD1975E.3000707@mi.parisdescartes.fr> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Le 16/05/2011 13:06, Barry Cisna a ?crit : > Francois, > > What distribution of K12LTSP are you using? 32-bit,64-bit? Thanks for answering, I am running fedore 10 (I know f15 is coming...). I have installed: ltspfs-0.5.8-1.fc10.i386 ltsp-utils-0.25-4.fc6.noarch ltsp-client-5.1.58-1.fc10.i386 ltsp-vmclient-5.1.58-1.fc10.i386 ltsp-server-5.1.58-1.fc10.i386 ltspfsd-0.5.8-1.fc10.i386 When I plug an usb drive on the thin client, an icon is mounted on the desktop of the thin client and on the desktop of the server. Permissions are granted to the owner of the session of the thin client The mount point is on /media/$user but permission are quite strange: ls -l /dev/$user gives: d????????? ? ? ? ? ? LEXAR_MEDIA the usb drive name is correct... but what is the meaning of all these "?" ? The drive is inaccessible even by root from the server: ls /media/cath/LEXAR_MEDIA: permission denied How can I change this behaviour? Thanks for any attention. - -- Fran?ois Patte UFR de math?matiques et informatique Universit? Paris Descartes 45, rue des Saints P?res F-75270 Paris Cedex 06 T?l. +33 (0)1 8394 5849 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3Rl10ACgkQdE6C2dhV2JUzPwCgokeJuXCs56f4aVxNQzHufzhK UkMAn2JIIRKCHSPjBB2iAv6TaLDB0HL2 =PfWc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr Mon May 16 21:37:42 2011 From: francois.patte at mi.parisdescartes.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois_Patte?=) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 23:37:42 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] unmounting an usb drive with ltsp [ERRATA] In-Reply-To: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> References: <1305543980.11777.4.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: <4DD19926.8080803@mi.parisdescartes.fr> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 errata to my previous mail I can unmount the usb drive on the server if I am root, using the command: umount /media/cath/LEXAR_MEDIA Then, if I list the directory /media/$user ($user=cath in my case) the name of the directory still remains, (with understandable permissions!): drwxr-x--- 2 root fam 4096 mai 16 23:16 LEXAR_MEDIA So what is the problem? Thanks again. - -- Fran?ois Patte UFR de math?matiques et informatique Universit? Paris Descartes 45, rue des Saints P?res F-75270 Paris Cedex 06 T?l. +33 (0)1 8394 5849 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3RmSYACgkQdE6C2dhV2JU39ACeO9/EWSQFgDO/8zWAi6huhVqr tl8AmwRrpWBPyPYoRcqNMaQ7AQfGX0I9 =wUps -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From warren at togami.com Tue May 17 02:14:55 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:14:55 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 Message-ID: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> Hi Folks, I am capable of making an EL6-based LTSP. But I have significant doubts that this community is worthwhile to create this software suite. Even years ago when LTSP was more relevant, I completely failed to recruit additional volunteers to help develop Fedora LTSP. Furthermore I am now reminded how thankless this job is, where I receive mostly grief and unrealistic expectations from people who contribute nothing. So here's the deal. I am willing to do this project in phases if we have a combination of donations and volunteers willing to write formal documentation. Phase I: Feasibility Assessment =============================== If this community makes donations totaling $250, I am willing to begin the feasibility assessment portion of this project. I will do some development only to the point of knowing if the EL6 base is feasible at all. If it isn't feasible, then the donation can be returned. Phase II: Development of EL6 Native for EPEL6 Inclusion ======================================================= An additional $500 will commence development. The goal of this portion is to make the Server and Client based on unmodified EL6. This would be suitable for inclusion in EPEL6. Server Side: GNOME 2, Firefox, Thunderbird, Evolution, OpenOffice suite. Client Side: Supported hardware would be anything i686 with PAE. Phase III: Release Install Media, Develop Alternate Client OS ============================================================= I will release the full install media with an additional $500 donation. Thereafter I will commence development of an alternative non-PAE i686 kernel and optional Debian /opt/ltsp/i386 to enable older client hardware. Phase IV: Software Updates through Year 2012 ============================================ $500 will enable a good faith effort to fix bugs, software updates in the EL6 LTSP stream, and refreshed EL6.1 or EL6.2 based LTSP install media through the end of year 2012. Tax Deductible ============== To prove that this isn't about personal enrichment but rather proving that the community will support this development, the full amount of these donations will go toward a particular 501(c)3 charity organization of my choosing. American donors may be able to benefit from a tax deduction. These are the conditions under which I am willing to spend my time on this cause. If you are interested in making a donation, you may reply on this list or contact me directly. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From microman at cmosnetworks.com Tue May 17 05:55:02 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 01:55:02 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> I am game for this. I hereby commit to a pledge of $50 for this effort, with possibly more to follow as this progresses. Additionally, I'm actually quite good at writing documentation, so I can help out here. I wrote the NMIS 4.3.6 documentation, which is now being used as the basis for the new v8 docs. If Warren's willing to do all this for just that amount of money...folks, that's a bargain. We'd be fools to pass this up. --TP Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I am capable of making an EL6-based LTSP. But I have significant > doubts that this community is worthwhile to create this software > suite. Even years ago when LTSP was more relevant, I completely > failed to recruit additional volunteers to help develop Fedora LTSP. > Furthermore I am now reminded how thankless this job is, where I > receive mostly grief and unrealistic expectations from people who > contribute nothing. > > So here's the deal. I am willing to do this project in phases if we > have a combination of donations and volunteers willing to write formal > documentation. > > Phase I: Feasibility Assessment > =============================== > If this community makes donations totaling $250, I am willing to begin > the feasibility assessment portion of this project. I will do some > development only to the point of knowing if the EL6 base is feasible > at all. If it isn't feasible, then the donation can be returned. > > Phase II: Development of EL6 Native for EPEL6 Inclusion > ======================================================= > An additional $500 will commence development. The goal of this > portion is to make the Server and Client based on unmodified EL6. > This would be suitable for inclusion in EPEL6. > > Server Side: GNOME 2, Firefox, Thunderbird, Evolution, OpenOffice suite. > Client Side: Supported hardware would be anything i686 with PAE. > > Phase III: Release Install Media, Develop Alternate Client OS > ============================================================= > I will release the full install media with an additional $500 > donation. Thereafter I will commence development of an alternative > non-PAE i686 kernel and optional Debian /opt/ltsp/i386 to enable older > client hardware. > > Phase IV: Software Updates through Year 2012 > ============================================ > $500 will enable a good faith effort to fix bugs, software updates in > the EL6 LTSP stream, and refreshed EL6.1 or EL6.2 based LTSP install > media through the end of year 2012. > > Tax Deductible > ============== > To prove that this isn't about personal enrichment but rather proving > that the community will support this development, the full amount of > these donations will go toward a particular 501(c)3 charity > organization of my choosing. American donors may be able to benefit > from a tax deduction. > > These are the conditions under which I am willing to spend my time on > this cause. If you are interested in making a donation, you may reply > on this list or contact me directly. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From burke at thealmquists.net Tue May 17 07:35:06 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 02:35:06 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> I know I'd be willing to pay $50 to get LTSP working on EL6. On May 17, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote: > I am game for this. I hereby commit to a pledge of $50 for this effort, with possibly more to follow as this progresses. > > Additionally, I'm actually quite good at writing documentation, so I can help out here. I wrote the NMIS 4.3.6 documentation, which is now being used as the basis for the new v8 docs. > > If Warren's willing to do all this for just that amount of money...folks, that's a bargain. We'd be fools to pass this up. > From julius at turtle.com Tue May 17 13:41:30 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 09:41:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: $100 from me. As far as I'm concerned, Warren should keep the money. I am grateful that he is willing to work so far below minimum wage. Julius On Tue, 17 May 2011, Burke Almquist wrote: > I know I'd be willing to pay $50 to get LTSP working on EL6. > > On May 17, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote: > > > I am game for this. I hereby commit to a pledge of $50 for this effort, with possibly more to follow as this progresses. > > > > Additionally, I'm actually quite good at writing documentation, so I can help out here. I wrote the NMIS 4.3.6 documentation, which is now being used as the basis for the new v8 docs. > > > > If Warren's willing to do all this for just that amount of money...folks, that's a bargain. We'd be fools to pass this up. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From Steven at simplycircus.com Tue May 17 16:09:19 2011 From: Steven at simplycircus.com (Steven Santos) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:09:19 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: I will pledge $50 towards this. Warren, how much would it cost me to get you to make EL6LTSP default to an LDAP server w/client option as the user back end? --- Steven Santos Director P: 617-527-0667 F: 617-934-1870 E: Steven at SimplyCircus.com Simply Circus, Inc. 86 Los Angeles Street Newton, MA 02462 On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote: > I am game for this. ?I hereby commit to a pledge of $50 for this effort, > with possibly more to follow as this progresses. > > Additionally, I'm actually quite good at writing documentation, so I can > help out here. ?I wrote the NMIS 4.3.6 documentation, which is now being > used as the basis for the new v8 docs. > > If Warren's willing to do all this for just that amount of money...folks, > that's a bargain. ?We'd be fools to pass this up. > > --TP > > > Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> >> Hi Folks, >> >> I am capable of making an EL6-based LTSP. ?But I have significant doubts >> that this community is worthwhile to create this software suite. ?Even years >> ago when LTSP was more relevant, I completely failed to recruit additional >> volunteers to help develop Fedora LTSP. ?Furthermore I am now reminded how >> thankless this job is, where I receive mostly grief and unrealistic >> expectations from people who contribute nothing. >> >> So here's the deal. ?I am willing to do this project in phases if we have >> a combination of donations and volunteers willing to write formal >> documentation. >> >> Phase I: Feasibility Assessment >> =============================== >> If this community makes donations totaling $250, I am willing to begin the >> feasibility assessment portion of this project. ?I will do some development >> only to the point of knowing if the EL6 base is feasible at all. ?If it >> isn't feasible, then the donation can be returned. >> >> Phase II: Development of EL6 Native for EPEL6 Inclusion >> ======================================================= >> An additional $500 will commence development. ?The goal of this portion is >> to make the Server and Client based on unmodified EL6. ?This would be >> suitable for inclusion in EPEL6. >> >> Server Side: GNOME 2, Firefox, Thunderbird, Evolution, OpenOffice suite. >> Client Side: Supported hardware would be anything i686 with PAE. >> >> Phase III: Release Install Media, Develop Alternate Client OS >> ============================================================= >> I will release the full install media with an additional $500 donation. >> ?Thereafter I will commence development of an alternative non-PAE i686 >> kernel and optional Debian /opt/ltsp/i386 to enable older client hardware. >> >> Phase IV: Software Updates through Year 2012 >> ============================================ >> $500 will enable a good faith effort to fix bugs, software updates in the >> EL6 LTSP stream, and refreshed EL6.1 or EL6.2 based LTSP install media >> through the end of year 2012. >> >> Tax Deductible >> ============== >> To prove that this isn't about personal enrichment but rather proving that >> the community will support this development, the full amount of these >> donations will go toward a particular 501(c)3 charity organization of my >> choosing. ?American donors may be able to benefit from a tax deduction. >> >> These are the conditions under which I am willing to spend my time on this >> cause. ?If you are interested in making a donation, you may reply on this >> list or contact me directly. >> >> Warren Togami >> warren at togami.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > From jim.kinney at gmail.com Tue May 17 16:24:29 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:24:29 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> Message-ID: I am very willing to add technical capabilities to this effort. Additionally, I can add documentation abilities as well (I've used publican before and am moderately versed in docbook). Also, I do have a small pile of servers, mostly 32-bit, some 64, and a small pile of assorted "school style" hardware as well as a few newer thin client tiny box devices from after my days doing K12LTSP at APS that can be put back to use as test platforms. I am also very willing to provide hosting for finished code, development code, git, trac, wiki, what ever is needed to help this process. On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I am capable of making an EL6-based LTSP. But I have significant doubts > that this community is worthwhile to create this software suite. Even years > ago when LTSP was more relevant, I completely failed to recruit additional > volunteers to help develop Fedora LTSP. Furthermore I am now reminded how > thankless this job is, where I receive mostly grief and unrealistic > expectations from people who contribute nothing. > > So here's the deal. I am willing to do this project in phases if we have a > combination of donations and volunteers willing to write formal > documentation. > > Phase I: Feasibility Assessment > =============================== > If this community makes donations totaling $250, I am willing to begin the > feasibility assessment portion of this project. I will do some development > only to the point of knowing if the EL6 base is feasible at all. If it > isn't feasible, then the donation can be returned. > > Phase II: Development of EL6 Native for EPEL6 Inclusion > ======================================================= > An additional $500 will commence development. The goal of this portion is > to make the Server and Client based on unmodified EL6. This would be > suitable for inclusion in EPEL6. > > Server Side: GNOME 2, Firefox, Thunderbird, Evolution, OpenOffice suite. > Client Side: Supported hardware would be anything i686 with PAE. > > Phase III: Release Install Media, Develop Alternate Client OS > ============================================================= > I will release the full install media with an additional $500 donation. > Thereafter I will commence development of an alternative non-PAE i686 > kernel and optional Debian /opt/ltsp/i386 to enable older client hardware. > > Phase IV: Software Updates through Year 2012 > ============================================ > $500 will enable a good faith effort to fix bugs, software updates in the > EL6 LTSP stream, and refreshed EL6.1 or EL6.2 based LTSP install media > through the end of year 2012. > > Tax Deductible > ============== > To prove that this isn't about personal enrichment but rather proving that > the community will support this development, the full amount of these > donations will go toward a particular 501(c)3 charity organization of my > choosing. American donors may be able to benefit from a tax deduction. > > These are the conditions under which I am willing to spend my time on this > cause. If you are interested in making a donation, you may reply on this > list or contact me directly. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Tue May 17 20:06:20 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:06:20 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD2D53C.2010603@togami.com> On 5/17/2011 6:24 AM, Jim Kinney wrote: > I am very willing to add technical capabilities to this effort. > Additionally, I can add documentation abilities as well (I've used > publican before and am moderately versed in docbook). Also, I do have a > small pile of servers, mostly 32-bit, some 64, and a small pile of > assorted "school style" hardware as well as a few newer thin client tiny > box devices from after my days doing K12LTSP at APS that can be put back > to use as test platforms. Testing of different "school style" client hardware will be very useful. But keep in mind the Phase II hardware compatibility will be somewhat limited for client hardware because i686 with PAE is the minimum with unmodified EL6. > > I am also very willing to provide hosting for finished code, development > code, git, trac, wiki, what ever is needed to help this process. We have hosting resources for everything already. k12linux.org is hosted by the infrastructure team of fedoraproject.org where we can have trac, wiki, git and mirroring resources. We will probably need more mirrors. Warren From warren at togami.com Tue May 17 20:21:57 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:21:57 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $225 Pledged Re: Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DD2D8E5.6080308@togami.com> On 5/17/2011 3:41 AM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > $100 from me. As far as I'm concerned, Warren should keep the money. I am > grateful that he is willing to work so far below minimum wage. > Julius This is very much appreciated. Each donor may choose to assign their donation to me or my designated charity if they wish. My designated charity is http://www.hcband.org, a 501(c)3 music education and community band organization where I am a volunteer musician. Yes, it has nothing to do with LTSP, but I hope to raise some money for this org and that is the condition of my participation in this project. So far $225 has been pledged. I will proceed with Phase I feasibility testing after $750 has been pledged (but not yet sent) as this seems like a sufficient amount of seriousness from this community. If you have pledged, please contact me directly so we can work out the best way to transfer money while minimizing transaction fees. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From warren at togami.com Tue May 17 20:25:52 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:25:52 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD2D9D0.3040308@togami.com> Hi Burke, I am not asking for money transfers just yet. I will need to see how serious this community is as a whole before deciding to launch the project. If I do decide to go ahead, you will have two choices. 1) Would you like to designate your donation to me, or to my designated charity? If the latter, then I can get you a receipt for tax purposes. 2) Do you have a Bank of America account? If so you can transfer money to me with no transaction fee. Otherwise mailing a personal check would be the best option. Paypal is the last resort, as they charge me a 3% transaction fee. Warren Togami warren at togami.com On 5/16/2011 9:35 PM, Burke Almquist wrote: > I know I'd be willing to pay $50 to get LTSP working on EL6. > > On May 17, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote: > >> I am game for this. I hereby commit to a pledge of $50 for this effort, with possibly more to follow as this progresses. >> >> Additionally, I'm actually quite good at writing documentation, so I can help out here. I wrote the NMIS 4.3.6 documentation, which is now being used as the basis for the new v8 docs. >> >> If Warren's willing to do all this for just that amount of money...folks, that's a bargain. We'd be fools to pass this up. >> From warren at togami.com Tue May 17 20:36:49 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:36:49 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $275 of $750 Pledged Re: Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: <4DD2DC61.8050104@togami.com> (Oops, I fail at math. That is $275 pledged so far.) On 5/17/2011 6:09 AM, Steven Santos wrote: > I will pledge $50 towards this. > > Warren, how much would it cost me to get you to make EL6LTSP default > to an LDAP server w/client option as the user back end? I am not fully versed in LDAP integration, but I suspect that it is a matter of standard system administration involving the LTSP server using a designated LDAP server as the authentication source, and mounting /home over the network to share the common home directories. This can be fragile and/or insecure if not configured properly, and it is outside the scope of what LTSP provides. If you cannot figure out how to deploy that type of network yourself from documentation/books, then you may need to hire a Linux consultant to configure it properly for your organization. I may know Linux experts in your area (I used to work from the Westford, MA Red Hat office). How big is your deployment? Do you already have a LDAP server and NFS server with all the home directories? Warren Togami warren at togami.com From Steven at simplycircus.com Tue May 17 23:41:15 2011 From: Steven at simplycircus.com (Steven Santos) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 19:41:15 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] $275 of $750 Pledged Re: Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD2DC61.8050104@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> <4DD2DC61.8050104@togami.com> Message-ID: We have been looking for an LDAP guru to do this for almost a year without success. If you know someone that you can refer me to, it would be a good thing, thanks! --- Steven Santos Director P: 617-527-0667 F: 617-934-1870 E: Steven at SimplyCircus.com Simply Circus, Inc. 86 Los Angeles Street Newton, MA 02462 On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > (Oops, I fail at math. ?That is $275 pledged so far.) > > On 5/17/2011 6:09 AM, Steven Santos wrote: >> >> I will pledge $50 towards this. >> >> Warren, how much would it cost me to get you to make EL6LTSP default >> to an LDAP server w/client option as the user back end? > > I am not fully versed in LDAP integration, but I suspect that it is a matter > of standard system administration involving the LTSP server using a > designated LDAP server as the authentication source, and mounting /home over > the network to share the common home directories. ?This can be fragile > and/or insecure if not configured properly, and it is outside the scope of > what LTSP provides. > > If you cannot figure out how to deploy that type of network yourself from > documentation/books, then you may need to hire a Linux consultant to > configure it properly for your organization. ?I may know Linux experts in > your area (I used to work from the Westford, MA Red Hat office). > > How big is your deployment? ?Do you already have a LDAP server and NFS > server with all the home directories? > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 18 05:26:59 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:26:59 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] $275 of $750 Pledged Re: Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD2DC61.8050104@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> <4DD2DC61.8050104@togami.com> Message-ID: <3E37D58B-D61B-4F40-A27D-C833837B44F9@thealmquists.net> On May 17, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > > On 5/17/2011 6:09 AM, Steven Santos wrote: >> I will pledge $50 towards this. >> >> Warren, how much would it cost me to get you to make EL6LTSP default >> to an LDAP server w/client option as the user back end? > > I am not fully versed in LDAP integration, but I suspect that it is a matter of standard system administration involving the LTSP server using a designated LDAP server as the authentication source, and mounting /home over the network to share the common home directories. This can be fragile and/or insecure if not configured properly, and it is outside the scope of what LTSP provides. > > If you cannot figure out how to deploy that type of network yourself from documentation/books, then you may need to hire a Linux consultant to configure it properly for your organization. I may know Linux experts in your area (I used to work from the Westford, MA Red Hat office). > > How big is your deployment? Do you already have a LDAP server and NFS server with all the home directories? If you are looking for a solution on RH/Fedora. http://directory.fedoraproject.org/ There is some good documentation there. Also the debian guys over at Skolelinux have a setup much like this, if you need something that works more or less "out of the box." If your install is big enough to need LDAP/NFS/SMB (You have multiple LTSP servers or you want workstations, some possibly with other OSes, to use the same central authentication and storage), you might be better off doing NFS/LDAP on a separate box anyway, since the hardware you want for LTSP is very different from what you want for something like NIS/NFS/LDAP/SMB. As you can guess, you don't need lots of CPU power for LDAP/NIS/NFS/SMB. What you need here is very reliable hardware with lots of disk and network I/O, which means a RAID setup with lots of storage and multiple gigE network connections. For that reason I tend to recommend putting your /home shares (NFS, SMB, etc) and NIS or LDAP on older server grade hardware, and using a desktop PC with a blazing CPU and tons of RAM (not much need for a fast GPU though) for your LTSP server. If an LTSP server has trouble, then at least it's cheep to replace (or to have multiple servers that can "failover" clients with a simple reboot), and it doesn't take down your workstations that are using the network authentication and storage. From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 18 05:31:53 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:31:53 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD2D9D0.3040308@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> <4DD2D9D0.3040308@togami.com> Message-ID: <03608B62-9D35-4B0D-A98B-745EB5AB2C11@thealmquists.net> On May 17, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi Burke, > > I am not asking for money transfers just yet. I will need to see how serious this community is as a whole before deciding to launch the project. > > If I do decide to go ahead, you will have two choices. > > 1) Would you like to designate your donation to me, or to my designated charity? If the latter, then I can get you a receipt for tax purposes. Since neither you nor your current employer are paying you for this work, I don't have a strong preference regarding who gets the donation. I've subscribed to Slackware Linux for a long time now. (I started on Linux with RH 6.0, and while I do test out each Fedora release, it's just too much churn to install it anywhere other than my personal desktop. The couple email/www "servers" I manage run Slackware.) I get a nice pressed CD set or DVD of each version, and I know that I'm helping to keep the maintainer gainfully employed and working on Slackware; so I have no problem paying a modest amount of money if it means keeping a project I love going. You might be right though, I DO think many people would be more likely to donate if they know it's going to a charitable cause. I was in a HS Jazz Band, and our director was big on us playing events in the community. It was a great experience for everyone. > 2) Do you have a Bank of America account? If so you can transfer money to me with no transaction fee. Otherwise mailing a personal check would be the best option. Paypal is the last resort, as they charge me a 3% transaction fee. I don't have a BofA account. I don't even think they have a branch around here. So personal check it is. Postage is still cheeper than Paypal I guess, certainly for donations greater than $20. From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 18 05:45:20 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:45:20 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DD2D9D0.3040308@togami.com> References: <4DD1DA1F.4080409@togami.com> <4DD20DB6.9020806@cmosnetworks.com> <867EAAA3-2AB0-4C37-AB70-C68088FBEE8D@thealmquists.net> <4DD2D9D0.3040308@togami.com> Message-ID: On May 17, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Hi Burke, > > I am not asking for money transfers just yet. I will need to see how serious this community is as a whole before deciding to launch the project. > > If I do decide to go ahead, you will have two choices. > > 1) Would you like to designate your donation to me, or to my designated charity? If the latter, then I can get you a receipt for tax purposes. > 2) Do you have a Bank of America account? If so you can transfer money to me with no transaction fee. Otherwise mailing a personal check would be the best option. Paypal is the last resort, as they charge me a 3% transaction fee. > Would it be ok if i put a note about this on the fedorahosted project wiki? Could we include a Paypal option for those making smaller donations or that can't or won't mail a check? If you are going to be maintaining this for a number of years, I'd like the option of doing a recurring yearly donation, of say $20, in addition to my one time pledge, through Paypal (or some other means) to your charity. This would give people an ongoing way to support any continuing work. From johno at islandwood.org Wed May 18 06:04:52 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 23:04:52 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Hi there, Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 18 07:46:03 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 02:46:03 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> On May 18, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: > Hi there, > > Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? > If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. I think you might be confused about just how LTSP works. The GUI you log into from the client is actually all on the server, with the possible exception of local some local apps. LTSP clients grab just enough of an OS to basically VNC into the server, so there isn't anything running on clients for you to VNC into. You can set up LTSP to run some apps on the local machine, but the session is still coming from the server. You can ssh onto the client machine, but there is no graphical session actually running on the client. If you want access to the displays on various clients, something like FL_Teachertool is probably your best bet. I'm not sure what it's status is on recent versions of LTSP though. You still lurking here Robert? OTOH, something like DRBL loads an OS image from the network each time it boots, but everything runs locally. It's great if you have lots of really beefy workstation. From jan at recreatie-zorg.nl Wed May 18 09:21:08 2011 From: jan at recreatie-zorg.nl (Jan Middelkoop) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 11:21:08 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD38F84.6070003@recreatie-zorg.nl> Actually, you can easily run x11vnc on the clients, and then you can VNC to the actual client, rather than just a desktop session. I use this to take over screens of the thin clients here, if users have questions about something on their desktop. If you just a want a remote desktop via VNC though (to work in), it's best to do that with a regular VNC server, independant of LTSP. VNC servers can provide users with a login prompt over a VNC session, just like LDM (the ltsp login manager) does on the thin clients. In the client chroot there's a /usr/share/ldm/rc.d/ directory, which contains scripts that executed on startup and exit of LDM. Scripts starting with "I" get run when LDM starts, "X" get run when LDM stops (when a user logs out of their desktop). On the server you'll find the directory at /opt/ltsp/i386/usr/share/ldm/rc.d/, naturally. I have a file which I call "I99-x11vnc", with in it: # /usr/bin/x11vnc -display :7 -xkb -loop -passwdfile /etc/x11vncpassword -nossl -logfile /var/log/x11vnc & Make sure the display number corresponds with the display used on the client (specified in lts.conf). Also create a file /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/x11vncpassword with the password in it, in plain text. I also created a script "X99-x11vnc" with # /usr/bin/killall x11vnc in it, so I don't get multiple x11vnc processes running. You could of course also put the x11vnc startup line in some other script on the client that gets executed after X startup, but I found it easiest to do alongside LDM. Kindest regards, Jan Middelkoop Op 18-5-2011 9:46, Burke Almquist schreef: > On May 18, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? >> If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. > I think you might be confused about just how LTSP works. The GUI you log into from the client is actually all on the server, with the possible exception of local some local apps. LTSP clients grab just enough of an OS to basically VNC into the server, so there isn't anything running on clients for you to VNC into. You can set up LTSP to run some apps on the local machine, but the session is still coming from the server. You can ssh onto the client machine, but there is no graphical session actually running on the client. If you want access to the displays on various clients, something like FL_Teachertool is probably your best bet. I'm not sure what it's status is on recent versions of LTSP though. > You still lurking here Robert? > > OTOH, something like DRBL loads an OS image from the network each time it boots, but everything runs locally. It's great if you have lots of really beefy workstation. > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From aahodson at episd.org Wed May 18 12:06:53 2011 From: aahodson at episd.org (Alan Hodson) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 06:06:53 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [K12OSN] Warren's terms In-Reply-To: <782939336.5964081305720404483.JavaMail.root@ecb-mx-mailbox1.episd.org> Message-ID: <1919799361.5964101305720413830.JavaMail.root@ecb-mx-mailbox1.episd.org> I value Warren's time and talent, so I commit to $100 towards the cause, and encourage others to do likewise. I am retiring at the end of this school year, so perhaps I will have some time to donate for documentation purposes also. Over the years, I have grown professionally and more importantly, thousands of El Paso ISD (TX) students have benefited from K12LTSP and the support provided by volunteers, so this is like payback time. I'm glad to do it. Alan A Hodson MEd. Instructional Applications Analyst El Paso Independent School District oF: 915-887-6871 fX: 915-772-4016 Nxt:915-892-0389 aahodson at episd.org - http://links.episd.org/ Open Source Proponent - http://tinyurl.com/3e4sh8 Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away -=o=- ----- 8>< ----- Hi Folks, I am capable of making an EL6-based LTSP. But I have significant doubts that this community is worthwhile to create this software suite. Even years ago when LTSP was more relevant, I completely failed to recruit additional volunteers to help develop Fedora LTSP. Furthermore I am now reminded how thankless this job is, where I receive mostly grief and unrealistic expectations from people who contribute nothing. So here's the deal. I am willing to do this project in phases if we have a combination of donations and volunteers willing to write formal documentation. Phase I: Feasibility Assessment ----- 8>< ----- From johno at islandwood.org Wed May 18 14:59:10 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 07:59:10 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <4DD38F84.6070003@recreatie-zorg.nl> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> <4DD38F84.6070003@recreatie-zorg.nl> Message-ID: <8B6DC014-B8AC-491E-BA3D-AD3EC9DBA83C@islandwood.org> Thank you for responding that is very helpful. I am using some machines to ten looped presentations which have both audio and video. I want to get into the local is to have sound run locally not on the server. John On May 18, 2011, at 2:22 AM, "Jan Middelkoop" wrote: > Actually, you can easily run x11vnc on the clients, and then you can VNC to the actual client, rather than just a desktop session. I use this to take over screens of the thin clients here, if users have questions about something on their desktop. > > If you just a want a remote desktop via VNC though (to work in), it's best to do that with a regular VNC server, independant of LTSP. VNC servers can provide users with a login prompt over a VNC session, just like LDM (the ltsp login manager) does on the thin clients. > > In the client chroot there's a /usr/share/ldm/rc.d/ directory, which contains scripts that executed on startup and exit of LDM. Scripts starting with "I" get run when LDM starts, "X" get run when LDM stops (when a user logs out of their desktop). > > On the server you'll find the directory at /opt/ltsp/i386/usr/share/ldm/rc.d/, naturally. > > I have a file which I call "I99-x11vnc", with in it: > # /usr/bin/x11vnc -display :7 -xkb -loop -passwdfile /etc/x11vncpassword -nossl -logfile /var/log/x11vnc & > > Make sure the display number corresponds with the display used on the client (specified in lts.conf). Also create a file /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/x11vncpassword with the password in it, in plain text. > > I also created a script "X99-x11vnc" with > # /usr/bin/killall x11vnc > in it, so I don't get multiple x11vnc processes running. > > You could of course also put the x11vnc startup line in some other script on the client that gets executed after X startup, but I found it easiest to do alongside LDM. > > Kindest regards, > Jan Middelkoop > > > Op 18-5-2011 9:46, Burke Almquist schreef: >> On May 18, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: >> >>> Hi there, >>> >>> Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? >>> If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. >> I think you might be confused about just how LTSP works. The GUI you log into from the client is actually all on the server, with the possible exception of local some local apps. LTSP clients grab just enough of an OS to basically VNC into the server, so there isn't anything running on clients for you to VNC into. You can set up LTSP to run some apps on the local machine, but the session is still coming from the server. You can ssh onto the client machine, but there is no graphical session actually running on the client. If you want access to the displays on various clients, something like FL_Teachertool is probably your best bet. I'm not sure what it's status is on recent versions of LTSP though. >> You still lurking here Robert? >> >> OTOH, something like DRBL loads an OS image from the network each time it boots, but everything runs locally. It's great if you have lots of really beefy workstation. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From jan at recreatie-zorg.nl Wed May 18 15:29:09 2011 From: jan at recreatie-zorg.nl (Jan Middelkoop) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 17:29:09 +0200 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <8B6DC014-B8AC-491E-BA3D-AD3EC9DBA83C@islandwood.org> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> <4DD38F84.6070003@recreatie-zorg.nl> <8B6DC014-B8AC-491E-BA3D-AD3EC9DBA83C@islandwood.org> Message-ID: <4DD3E5C5.7050307@recreatie-zorg.nl> You can run commands locally on the clients by using the command "ltsp-localapps" on the clients. Open a terminal on a client, type "ltsp-localapps xterm" and it'll give you a terminal running on the client. You could create a script on the server, that starts the presentation as a local app on the client. If you make a launcher icon in Gnome to the script, then all users have to do is click the icon to start the presentation locally. This would seem like a better solution to what you're trying to achieve. Kindest regards, Jan Middelkoop Op 18-5-2011 16:59, John Oligario schreef: > Thank you for responding that is very helpful. > I am using some machines to ten looped presentations which have both audio and video. I want to get into the local is to have sound run locally not on the server. > John > > On May 18, 2011, at 2:22 AM, "Jan Middelkoop" wrote: > >> Actually, you can easily run x11vnc on the clients, and then you can VNC to the actual client, rather than just a desktop session. I use this to take over screens of the thin clients here, if users have questions about something on their desktop. >> >> If you just a want a remote desktop via VNC though (to work in), it's best to do that with a regular VNC server, independant of LTSP. VNC servers can provide users with a login prompt over a VNC session, just like LDM (the ltsp login manager) does on the thin clients. >> >> In the client chroot there's a /usr/share/ldm/rc.d/ directory, which contains scripts that executed on startup and exit of LDM. Scripts starting with "I" get run when LDM starts, "X" get run when LDM stops (when a user logs out of their desktop). >> >> On the server you'll find the directory at /opt/ltsp/i386/usr/share/ldm/rc.d/, naturally. >> >> I have a file which I call "I99-x11vnc", with in it: >> # /usr/bin/x11vnc -display :7 -xkb -loop -passwdfile /etc/x11vncpassword -nossl -logfile /var/log/x11vnc& >> >> Make sure the display number corresponds with the display used on the client (specified in lts.conf). Also create a file /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/x11vncpassword with the password in it, in plain text. >> >> I also created a script "X99-x11vnc" with >> # /usr/bin/killall x11vnc >> in it, so I don't get multiple x11vnc processes running. >> >> You could of course also put the x11vnc startup line in some other script on the client that gets executed after X startup, but I found it easiest to do alongside LDM. >> >> Kindest regards, >> Jan Middelkoop >> >> >> Op 18-5-2011 9:46, Burke Almquist schreef: >>> On May 18, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: >>> >>>> Hi there, >>>> >>>> Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? >>>> If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. >>> I think you might be confused about just how LTSP works. The GUI you log into from the client is actually all on the server, with the possible exception of local some local apps. LTSP clients grab just enough of an OS to basically VNC into the server, so there isn't anything running on clients for you to VNC into. You can set up LTSP to run some apps on the local machine, but the session is still coming from the server. You can ssh onto the client machine, but there is no graphical session actually running on the client. If you want access to the displays on various clients, something like FL_Teachertool is probably your best bet. I'm not sure what it's status is on recent versions of LTSP though. >>> You still lurking here Robert? >>> >>> OTOH, something like DRBL loads an OS image from the network each time it boots, but everything runs locally. It's great if you have lots of really beefy workstation. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> K12OSN mailing list >>> K12OSN at redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >>> For more info see >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From cfiaime at cfiaime.com Wed May 18 16:13:35 2011 From: cfiaime at cfiaime.com (Jeffrey Williams) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 10:13:35 -0600 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 Message-ID: <1305735215.4dd3f02f592a3@webmail.no-ip.com> Greetings, Count me in for helping with documentation and at least $25. jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com From robark at gmail.com Wed May 18 16:23:31 2011 From: robark at gmail.com (Robert Arkiletian) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 09:23:31 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <8C9423BC-E799-43CA-81B4-44759D25D707@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Burke Almquist wrote: > > On May 18, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets loaded upon LTSP bootup? >> If so what would a username be? When I shell to the terminal window I am presented with a logon however using root does not work, or there is a totally different password. > > I think you might be confused about just how LTSP works. The GUI you log into from the client is actually all on the server, with the possible exception of local some local apps. LTSP clients grab just enough of an OS to basically VNC into the server, so there isn't anything running on clients for you to VNC into. You can set up LTSP to run some apps on the local machine, but the session is still coming from the server. You can ssh onto the client machine, but there is no graphical session actually running on the client. If you want access to the displays on various clients, something like FL_Teachertool is probably your best bet. I'm not sure what it's status is on recent versions of LTSP though. > You still lurking here Robert? > Yup still lurking. :-) LTSP4 had a version of X that would support a vnc server module built right into X. But since LTSP5, I changed fl_tt to work with x11vnc being launched on the client. I have docs up how to set it up here http://www3.telus.net/public/robark/Fl_TeacherTool/k12linuxinstall.txt But I think Barry made an rpm that does it all. > OTOH, something like DRBL loads an OS image from the network each time it boots, but everything runs locally. It's great if you have lots of really beefy workstation. > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- Robert Arkiletian Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada From news at siddall.name Wed May 18 19:28:18 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 15:28:18 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] vnc to locally loaded ltsp? In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776926@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DD41DD2.2020308@siddall.name> On 05/18/2011 02:04 AM, John Oligario wrote: > Hi there, > > Is there a way to VNC to the locally loaded version of Linux which gets > loaded upon LTSP bootup? Since I rarely need to run VNC to a client (ie: remote support only) I don't start it at bootup, but one simple command will fire it up when necessary. Here's what I use: http://ltsp4.2.revamp-it.ch/twiki/bin/view/ltsp/X11vncLocalApp Jeff From warren at togami.com Wed May 18 21:45:41 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 11:45:41 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $400 Pledged In-Reply-To: <1305735215.4dd3f02f592a3@webmail.no-ip.com> References: <1305735215.4dd3f02f592a3@webmail.no-ip.com> Message-ID: <4DD43E05.5070103@togami.com> On 5/18/2011 6:13 AM, Jeffrey Williams wrote: > Greetings, > > Count me in for helping with documentation and at least $25. > > jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com This puts us at $400 pledged. I'd prefer to commence development after we have at least $750. Warren From warren at togami.com Fri May 20 07:40:47 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 21:40:47 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment Message-ID: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> A total of $500 has been pledged. I have not yet asked anyone to send any money. I have begun to look at feasibility of this project. Warren From sbarar at gmail.com Fri May 20 09:52:44 2011 From: sbarar at gmail.com (Sudev Barar) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:22:44 +0530 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> References: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> Message-ID: On 20 May 2011 13:15, "Warren Togami" wrote: > > A total of $500 has been pledged. I have not yet asked anyone to send any money. > pledge $100 to kitty -- Sudev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Fri May 20 13:08:39 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 03:08:39 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $600 Pledged Re: Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> Message-ID: <4DD667D7.6060503@togami.com> On 05/12/2011 05:36 AM, Gavin Spurgeon wrote: > > I am sure that I/we/others could do the same with the current upstream > code on F14, F15 or even EL6/CentOS/SL6. > > I have a week of down time from my day-2-day job coming very soon, so > would have no issue trying get a very basic current upstream version > built and packaged (.rpm) ready for people to test, I had loads of > people contact me about testing the .rpm's I built for F13 and loads of > feedback for users who did play with the packages on both F13& F14. I looked at your RPMS at http://www.dageek.co.uk/ltsp/ and noticed a notable lack of .src.rpm's. Although it is not my intent to make Fedora work, I want to take your minimal changes and commit them to upstream ltsp so we don't have confusing forks. Technically you are correct: With minimal changes F-14 could be installable. However Fedora is highly problematic with LTSP for several reasons. First, F-14 lacks support for the vast majority of existing LTSP client hardware. The picture is far worse for F-15 due to big changes in the core distro. systemd will require some LTSP surgery, while GNOME 3 is a complete non-starter. Furthermore, Fedora's rapid change and short support period makes it undesirable for both LTSP development and the target deployment market. Fedora's rapidly moving target often breaks functionality you depend on, while it is completely untenable for organizations to upgrade their Fedora LTSP server every year in order to keep up with security updates. For this reason, we would be better off focusing all of our efforts on an EL6-based LTSP server. The target deployment of LTSP wants "legacy" desktop environments like GNOME 2. The entire stack of kernel, drivers, desktop environment and security sensitive apps like Firefox will be maintained for years, and largely without destabilizing changes during that lifetime. Yes, EL-6 based LTSP has the same client hardware support problem as Fedora. I will do some experimentation here of both rebuilding the entire client distro to i586 or using a Debian /opt/ltsp/i386, to determine which requires less effort to support in the coming years. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From microman at cmosnetworks.com Fri May 20 14:57:39 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:57:39 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] $600 Pledged Re: Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora In-Reply-To: <4DD667D7.6060503@togami.com> References: <4DC6919D.5060607@togami.com> <4DC7F7F8.3050507@siddall.name> <4DCB0A7E.7000003@togami.com> <4DCBFE95.7040000@dageek.co.uk> <4DD667D7.6060503@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD68163.80700@cmosnetworks.com> Warren Togami wrote: > > we would be better off focusing all of our efforts on an EL6-based > LTSP server I couldn't agree more with Warren's reasoning here. Fedora is too bleeding-edge for a production server that "must work". It's basically a perpetual beta. That's why RHEL (and thus CentOS) exists. --TP From dahopkins429 at gmail.com Fri May 20 15:11:45 2011 From: dahopkins429 at gmail.com (David Hopkins) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:11:45 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> References: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> Message-ID: I'll pledge $100 to the effort. I also have various hardware available at the school consisting older and newer servers and various clients, and can test using these if desired. Sincerely, Dave Hopkins Parent Volunteer Newark Charter School Newark Delaware On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 3:40 AM, Warren Togami wrote: > A total of $500 has been pledged. ?I have not yet asked anyone to send any > money. > > I have begun to look at feasibility of this project. > > Warren > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > From gjk_lists at rogers.com Fri May 20 23:32:11 2011 From: gjk_lists at rogers.com (Gustav J Kramer) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> References: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> Message-ID: <1305934331.3011.3.camel@zotac> On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 21:40 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > A total of $500 has been pledged. I have not yet asked anyone to send > any money. I'm good for $50 but will likely have to use PayPal as I live north of your border. - gustav From Steven at simplycircus.com Sat May 21 00:17:35 2011 From: Steven at simplycircus.com (Steven Santos) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 20:17:35 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <1305934331.3011.3.camel@zotac> References: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> <1305934331.3011.3.camel@zotac> Message-ID: Warren, I go on a trip starting Tuesday, and I get back on the 10th. Can I send you the $50 now, or should I wait until I get back? --- Steven Santos Director P: 617-527-0667 F: 617-934-1870 E: Steven at SimplyCircus.com Simply Circus, Inc. 86 Los Angeles Street Newton, MA 02462 On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Gustav J Kramer wrote: > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 21:40 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: >> A total of $500 has been pledged. ?I have not yet asked anyone to send >> any money. > > I'm good for $50 but will likely have to use PayPal as I live north of > your border. > > - gustav > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > > From warren at togami.com Sat May 21 00:32:52 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:32:52 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment Message-ID: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> I did some quick hacking of LTSP upstream on SL6 in order to determine what works and what is broken. GOOD ==== * Installed /opt/ltsp/i386 with lots of error messages. * WORKING: Client Login to GNOME desktop. * WORKING: Remote sound, Youtube video played with audio in sync. BAD, BUT I KNOW HOW TO FIX ========================== * LOTS OF ERROR MESSAGES DURING BOOT * nc syntax seems to have changed (?) * qemu-kvm changed to discourage direct use. SDL-mode longer supported. This means ltsp-vmclient cannot be used anymore as method for rapid thin client testing. I suspect this could be worked around by manually modifying a virt-manager VM configuration to connect to ltspbr0 and PXE boot. * nbd-server changed, need to redo how LTSP handles both the client and server side of NBD. * Wow. My documentation on k12linux.org sucks a lot. BAD, NOT SURE HOW TO FIX YET ============================ * BROKEN: Something is seriously wrong with pxelinux. I was able to manually boot only by typing in parameters. * BROKEN: K12LINUX themed ldm is broken. * BROKEN: Remote USB storage (ltspfs) * CONFUSING: Various parts of GNOME desktop like PackageKit are confused because ConsoleKit has no awareness of ssh logins, manifesting in various broken dialogs and annoying pop-up login screen during every user login. * BROKEN: Crippling blocker issue with locked screens, need to talk to GNOME developers ... BAD, LIMITATIONS OF EL6 HARDWARE SUPPORT ======================================== i686 with PAE minimum means the majority of existing LTSP client hardware are unsupported. Additionally, EL6 kernel lacks nbd.ko. Partial Solution: Kernel-only replacement for /opt/ltsp/i386. i686 without PAE with nbd.ko included would support *more* hardware, but still a large percentage of LTSP client hardware that is i586 will not work. Full Solution: Rebuild 500+ client packages to i586 or use Debian for /opt/ltsp/i386. Either option is bad because of significant effort to initially create it, and long-term support issues. Analysis ======== This is significantly more broken than I expected. Worrisome are the broken parts of GNOME, because we likely cannot get patches into upstream EL6, and any patched packages that we ship ourselves will be a long term maintenance burden. I will do a little more feasibility testing later, but I already can say that this is looking like too much work for the previous cost estimate. In short: Yes, this appears feasible. But it will be a LOT of work to make it an acceptable solution. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From warren at togami.com Sat May 21 00:37:53 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:37:53 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $500 Pledged, Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: References: <4DD61AFF.2070200@togami.com> <1305934331.3011.3.camel@zotac> Message-ID: <4DD70961.4080900@togami.com> On 5/20/2011 2:17 PM, Steven Santos wrote: > Warren, > > I go on a trip starting Tuesday, and I get back on the 10th. Can I > send you the $50 now, or should I wait until I get back? > --- > Steven Santos > Director > P: 617-527-0667 > F: 617-934-1870 > E: Steven at SimplyCircus.com > See my previous post: "K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment" I haven't decided if this project is feasible yet, but I suppose I could simply return your transfer if I decide to abort the project. So I guess go ahead if you want, or after you are back is fine too. Warren From burke at thealmquists.net Sat May 21 01:05:46 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (burke at thealmquists.net) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 20:05:46 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment Message-ID: I know I didn't expect you to ever get i586 clients working on EL5. I think anyone who wants that is better off using ubuntu/debian, or ltsp 4 on el5. "Warren Togami Jr." wrote: >I did some quick hacking of LTSP upstream on SL6 in order to determine >what works and what is broken. > >GOOD >==== >* Installed /opt/ltsp/i386 with lots of error messages. >* WORKING: Client Login to GNOME desktop. >* WORKING: Remote sound, Youtube video played with audio in sync. > >BAD, BUT I KNOW HOW TO FIX >========================== >* LOTS OF ERROR MESSAGES DURING BOOT >* nc syntax seems to have changed (?) >* qemu-kvm changed to discourage direct use. SDL-mode longer supported. > This means ltsp-vmclient cannot be used anymore as method for rapid >thin client testing. I suspect this could be worked around by manually >modifying a virt-manager VM configuration to connect to ltspbr0 and PXE >boot. >* nbd-server changed, need to redo how LTSP handles both the client and >server side of NBD. >* Wow. My documentation on k12linux.org sucks a lot. > >BAD, NOT SURE HOW TO FIX YET >============================ >* BROKEN: Something is seriously wrong with pxelinux. I was able to >manually boot only by typing in parameters. >* BROKEN: K12LINUX themed ldm is broken. >* BROKEN: Remote USB storage (ltspfs) >* CONFUSING: Various parts of GNOME desktop like PackageKit are confused >because ConsoleKit has no awareness of ssh logins, manifesting in >various broken dialogs and annoying pop-up login screen during every >user login. >* BROKEN: Crippling blocker issue with locked screens, need to talk to >GNOME developers ... > >BAD, LIMITATIONS OF EL6 HARDWARE SUPPORT >======================================== >i686 with PAE minimum means the majority of existing LTSP client >hardware are unsupported. Additionally, EL6 kernel lacks nbd.ko. > >Partial Solution: Kernel-only replacement for /opt/ltsp/i386. i686 >without PAE with nbd.ko included would support *more* hardware, but >still a large percentage of LTSP client hardware that is i586 will not work. > >Full Solution: Rebuild 500+ client packages to i586 or use Debian for >/opt/ltsp/i386. Either option is bad because of significant effort to >initially create it, and long-term support issues. > >Analysis >======== >This is significantly more broken than I expected. Worrisome are the >broken parts of GNOME, because we likely cannot get patches into >upstream EL6, and any patched packages that we ship ourselves will be a >long term maintenance burden. > >I will do a little more feasibility testing later, but I already can say >that this is looking like too much work for the previous cost estimate. > >In short: Yes, this appears feasible. But it will be a LOT of work to >make it an acceptable solution. > >Warren Togami >warren at togami.com > >_______________________________________________ >K12OSN mailing list >K12OSN at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >For more info see From news at siddall.name Sat May 21 02:27:02 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 22:27:02 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> References: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD722F6.9050305@siddall.name> On 05/20/2011 08:32 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > Analysis > ======== > This is significantly more broken than I expected. Worrisome are the > broken parts of GNOME, because we likely cannot get patches into > upstream EL6, and any patched packages that we ship ourselves will be a > long term maintenance burden. Out of curiosity, can you try KDE4 and see if it works any better? I use KDE4 daily on F13 K12Linux and am very happy with it. Is RHEL6 that much different? Jeff From news at siddall.name Sat May 21 02:57:53 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 22:57:53 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> On 05/20/2011 09:05 PM, burke at thealmquists.net wrote: > I know I didn't expect you to ever get i586 clients working on EL5. I think anyone who wants that is better off using ubuntu/debian, or ltsp 4 on el5. > > "Warren Togami Jr." wrote: >> BAD, LIMITATIONS OF EL6 HARDWARE SUPPORT >> ======================================== >> i686 with PAE minimum means the majority of existing LTSP client >> hardware are unsupported. Additionally, EL6 kernel lacks nbd.ko. I am still a bit puzzled by this i586 stuff. i586 hasn't worked on K12Linux since F11 and now we are four releases beyond that. Telling people that they need to upgrade from an architecture that came out in 1993 (that's 18 years ago) to be able to run the latest versions of stuff doesn't seem that crazy. Even low power embedded CPUs like the Via C3 are now a decade old and, at least in Fedora, the Geode is considered an i686. Jeff From warren at togami.com Sat May 21 03:12:53 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:12:53 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment Message-ID: You have no issues with sound? Last I tried remote pulseaudio sound with KDE in Fedora 12 it didn't work. KDE is an option. I was also considering something lighter weight like XFCE. Sent from my Samsung Epic? 4G Jeff Siddall wrote: >On 05/20/2011 08:32 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> Analysis >> ======== >> This is significantly more broken than I expected. Worrisome are the >> broken parts of GNOME, because we likely cannot get patches into >> upstream EL6, and any patched packages that we ship ourselves will be a >> long term maintenance burden. > >Out of curiosity, can you try KDE4 and see if it works any better? I >use KDE4 daily on F13 K12Linux and am very happy with it. Is RHEL6 that >much different? > >Jeff > >_______________________________________________ >K12OSN mailing list >K12OSN at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >For more info see From burke at thealmquists.net Sat May 21 04:52:20 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 23:52:20 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> Message-ID: <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> On May 20, 2011, at 9:57 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/20/2011 09:05 PM, burke at thealmquists.net wrote: >> I know I didn't expect you to ever get i586 clients working on EL5. I think anyone who wants that is better off using ubuntu/debian, or ltsp 4 on el5. >> >> "Warren Togami Jr." wrote: >>> BAD, LIMITATIONS OF EL6 HARDWARE SUPPORT >>> ======================================== >>> i686 with PAE minimum means the majority of existing LTSP client >>> hardware are unsupported. Additionally, EL6 kernel lacks nbd.ko. > > I am still a bit puzzled by this i586 stuff. i586 hasn't worked on > K12Linux since F11 and now we are four releases beyond that. > > Telling people that they need to upgrade from an architecture that came > out in 1993 (that's 18 years ago) to be able to run the latest versions > of stuff doesn't seem that crazy. Even low power embedded CPUs like the > Via C3 are now a decade old and, at least in Fedora, the Geode is > considered an i686. I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. From microman at cmosnetworks.com Sat May 21 04:58:43 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 00:58:43 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> Burke Almquist wrote: > On May 20, 2011, at 9:57 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > > >> On 05/20/2011 09:05 PM, burke at thealmquists.net wrote: >> >>> I know I didn't expect you to ever get i586 clients working on EL5. I think anyone who wants that is better off using ubuntu/debian, or ltsp 4 on el5. >>> >>> "Warren Togami Jr." wrote: >>> >>>> BAD, LIMITATIONS OF EL6 HARDWARE SUPPORT >>>> ======================================== >>>> i686 with PAE minimum means the majority of existing LTSP client >>>> hardware are unsupported. Additionally, EL6 kernel lacks nbd.ko. >>>> >> I am still a bit puzzled by this i586 stuff. i586 hasn't worked on >> K12Linux since F11 and now we are four releases beyond that. >> >> Telling people that they need to upgrade from an architecture that came >> out in 1993 (that's 18 years ago) to be able to run the latest versions >> of stuff doesn't seem that crazy. Even low power embedded CPUs like the >> Via C3 are now a decade old and, at least in Fedora, the Geode is >> considered an i686. >> > > I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. > The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. > I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. > +1. All my thin clients are now PII's (i686's) or PIII's. The i686 architecture has now been out for just over 15 years, since the Pentium Pro. If you want to run new software, an upgrade isn't inappropriate to expect. And K12LTSP 5EL still ain't "broke". It still works just as well as it did when Eric Harrison first released it. Seriously, what's the problem here? --TP From burke at thealmquists.net Sat May 21 05:04:53 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 00:04:53 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> >>> >> >> I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. >> The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. >> I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. >> > > +1. All my thin clients are now PII's (i686's) or PIII's. The i686 architecture has now been out for just over 15 years, since the Pentium Pro. If you want to run new software, an upgrade isn't inappropriate to expect. And K12LTSP 5EL still ain't "broke". It still works just as well as it did when Eric Harrison first released it. Seriously, what's the problem here? > How much longer is EL5 supported for? From microman at cmosnetworks.com Sat May 21 05:37:07 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 01:37:07 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> Burke Almquist wrote: >>> I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. >>> The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. >>> I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. >>> >>> >> +1. All my thin clients are now PII's (i686's) or PIII's. The i686 architecture has now been out for just over 15 years, since the Pentium Pro. If you want to run new software, an upgrade isn't inappropriate to expect. And K12LTSP 5EL still ain't "broke". It still works just as well as it did when Eric Harrison first released it. Seriously, what's the problem here? >> >> > How much longer is EL5 supported for? > Till 2014. We've got 3 more years. --TP From burke at thealmquists.net Sat May 21 05:51:54 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 00:51:54 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> Message-ID: <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> On May 21, 2011, at 12:37 AM, Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote: > > > Burke Almquist wrote: >>>> I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. >>>> The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. >>>> I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. >>>> >>> +1. All my thin clients are now PII's (i686's) or PIII's. The i686 architecture has now been out for just over 15 years, since the Pentium Pro. If you want to run new software, an upgrade isn't inappropriate to expect. And K12LTSP 5EL still ain't "broke". It still works just as well as it did when Eric Harrison first released it. Seriously, what's the problem here? >>> >>> >> How much longer is EL5 supported for? >> > > Till 2014. We've got 3 more years. I guess my question is, who on the list is still using clients that aren't i686? How many of them do you have, what are they, how long do you plan to keep using them, and are they even powerful enough for LTSP5? Is lack of i586 support a deal breaker for anyone on the list, especially those who have pledged, or are considering pledging to this project? > > --TP > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From warren at togami.com Sat May 21 07:56:27 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 21:56:27 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD7702B.2010407@togami.com> On 5/20/2011 7:51 PM, Burke Almquist wrote: > I guess my question is, who on the list is still using clients that aren't i686? > How many of them do you have, what are they, how long do you plan to keep using them, and are they even powerful enough for LTSP5? > Is lack of i586 support a deal breaker for anyone on the list, especially those who have pledged, or are considering pledging to this project? This is indeed a big question. You folks might have plenty of PIII or P4's, but those old machines use a TON of power compared to the VIA thin clients, many of which are only i586. In many cases it is like a 10 to 1 ratio in power usage. Warren From gspurgeon at dageek.co.uk Sat May 21 09:56:11 2011 From: gspurgeon at dageek.co.uk (Gavin Spurgeon) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 10:56:11 +0100 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment - PXE In-Reply-To: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> References: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD78C3B.8040203@dageek.co.uk> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 21/05/2011 01:32, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > BAD, NOT SURE HOW TO FIX YET > ============================ > * BROKEN: Something is seriously wrong with pxelinux. I was able to > manually boot only by typing in parameters. Can you elaborate on this point ? Is it just a pxeconfig.cfg/default menu issue ? This is something that I (or someone else) might be able to help with. - -- Gavin Spurgeon. AKA Da Geek - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The happiest of people don't necessarily have the best of everything, they just make the most of everything that comes along their way.." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.12 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEUEARECAAYFAk3XjDsACgkQvp6arS3vDipvXACWKvYqnRahoB3m851/DQ6E28oB EQCfQ41iEYE4TAbzAlvvWyRBYKvjBnM= =RukQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- This message was scanned by DaGeek Spam Filter and is believed to be clean. From news at siddall.name Sat May 21 14:39:20 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 10:39:20 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> On 05/20/2011 11:12 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > You have no issues with sound? Last I tried remote pulseaudio sound with KDE in Fedora 12 it didn't work. Nope, never had any sound issues at all. Works great. On F13 now, but it worked on F12 also. Jeff From johno at islandwood.org Sat May 21 14:49:20 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 07:49:20 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had very poor speed, jerkiness etc. John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Siddall Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 7:39 AM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment On 05/20/2011 11:12 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > You have no issues with sound? Last I tried remote pulseaudio sound with KDE in Fedora 12 it didn't work. Nope, never had any sound issues at all. Works great. On F13 now, but it worked on F12 also. Jeff _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From news at siddall.name Sat May 21 16:03:13 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 12:03:13 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD7E241.3000804@siddall.name> On 05/21/2011 12:52 AM, Burke Almquist wrote: > I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. > The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. > I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. Keep in mind that only the early C3's were i586. Everything Via has made since the Nehemiah architecture released in 2003 (8 years ago) has been i686. Jeff From microman at cmosnetworks.com Sat May 21 16:22:47 2011 From: microman at cmosnetworks.com (Terrell Prude' Jr.) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 12:22:47 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD7E241.3000804@siddall.name> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD7E241.3000804@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DD7E6D7.1030705@cmosnetworks.com> Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/21/2011 12:52 AM, Burke Almquist wrote: > >> I know the clients I use are 10+ year old Dell PIIIs. It if you are relying on used PCs, it shouldn't be too hard to find some old P4 or PIII based PCs. >> The only concern would be 4-5? year old thin clients that had VIA or some other processors that didn't yet have i686 support. >> I guess there's alway EL5 and LTSP 4.2 or Ubuntu/Debian for these. >> > > Keep in mind that only the early C3's were i586. Everything Via has > made since the Nehemiah architecture released in 2003 (8 years ago) has > been i686. > > Jeff > And thus, by the time K12LTSP 5EL support finally ends, those i586's will be 11 years old. At a certain point, yes, it is time to get newer stuff if you want to run the latest software. Remember that newer thin clients also tend to have better video chips, which a lot of EDU apps demand (Flash, HTML5, etc.). I think we should remember to focus on the bigger picture here. We already have K12LTSP 5EL today, which works great and is not going to disappear tomorrow. The goal now is to get a K12Linux 6EL distro running LTSP 5. Now, if it were easy for Warren to include i586 in there, I'd say sure, but it sounds like it'll be a fair amount of extra effort that could be aimed at "more critical" things, i. e. getting a K12Linux 6EL distro working at all. :-) --TP From warren at togami.com Sun May 22 03:05:08 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 17:05:08 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment - PXE In-Reply-To: <4DD78C3B.8040203@dageek.co.uk> References: <4DD70834.90103@togami.com> <4DD78C3B.8040203@dageek.co.uk> Message-ID: <4DD87D64.70508@togami.com> On 5/20/2011 11:56 PM, Gavin Spurgeon wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 21/05/2011 01:32, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> BAD, NOT SURE HOW TO FIX YET >> ============================ >> * BROKEN: Something is seriously wrong with pxelinux. I was able to >> manually boot only by typing in parameters. > > Can you elaborate on this point ? > Is it just a pxeconfig.cfg/default menu issue ? > > This is something that I (or someone else) might be able to help with. There appear to be two issues in the EL6 version of pxelinux.0. 1. Using tcpdump, I see it does download the pxelinux.cfg/default file, but it fails to comprehend the contents. It downloads the kernel and initrd if I type those parameters manually at that prompt. 2. That kernel panics for some reason I don't understand. Both of these issues seem to go away if I drop-in the pxelinux.0 from Fedora 12. (havne't tested other versions). Warren From warren at togami.com Sun May 22 14:02:01 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 04:02:01 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Fund Drive Message-ID: <4DD91759.5090509@togami.com> K12Linux EL6 is a Go! ===================== After further feasibility testing, I now believe that this is a feasible project. Unfortunately, the amount of work is a lot more than I originally expected. So here is the new deal. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive Details of the Fund Drive are here. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/EL6Status Status of K12Linux EL6 development is here. Already a long list of stuff to fix... but past experience suggests that fixing one thing will only allow me to discover more broken pieces. The new fundraising targets may seem lofty, but I believe it is achievable because I heard back from more companies than expected, and there is a strong possibility of larger corporate sponsors coming in to make matching challenge grants. For example, is willing to donate $500 if five new members give $100. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive#RecognitionofSponsors As noted here, Corporate Sponsors have a BIG incentive to give due to the huge potential for brand exposure. This is a very low price for this kind of PR! If funds raised exceed these targets, then that may fund my ability to begin work on the far more difficult Phase 4 of the project. Contact Me Directly =================== If you are ready to send money, please contact me directly so we can figure out the details to minimize transaction costs and maximize the tax benefits to you. Fund Drive Totals ================= https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive The top of this page will say the current pledged and received totals. I think I screwed up my math earlier as I was confused by mail being sent to this list, directly to my mail, or to both. Far Future of K12Linux.org ========================== After K12Linux EL6 is mature, I want to work on the Next Generation replacement for LTSP. It is absolutely clear that EL6 will be the final supportable release of RH-based LTSP. If we are to have any Open Source terminal server solution later, it is going to based on some sort of VDI. I envision K12Linux.org will raise smaller amounts of money in future years to support the legacy EL6 distribution. Then using that community momentum, we will separately fund development of a modern VDI-based next generation replacement for the insecure and inefficient LTSP approach. The Open Source pieces to build this already exist in libvirt, virt-manager, kvm, and SPICE. It just would take a lot of work to integrate those pieces in a coherent way, wrap it in a new K12Linux branded management solution, and make it easy to deploy. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From johno at islandwood.org Sun May 22 18:26:34 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 11:26:34 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Fund Drive In-Reply-To: <4DD91759.5090509@togami.com> References: <4DD91759.5090509@togami.com> Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B79@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Bait and switch, lol John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | M 206.724.4556 "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Warren Togami Jr. Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 7:02 AM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Fund Drive K12Linux EL6 is a Go! ===================== After further feasibility testing, I now believe that this is a feasible project. Unfortunately, the amount of work is a lot more than I originally expected. So here is the new deal. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive Details of the Fund Drive are here. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/EL6Status Status of K12Linux EL6 development is here. Already a long list of stuff to fix... but past experience suggests that fixing one thing will only allow me to discover more broken pieces. The new fundraising targets may seem lofty, but I believe it is achievable because I heard back from more companies than expected, and there is a strong possibility of larger corporate sponsors coming in to make matching challenge grants. For example, is willing to donate $500 if five new members give $100. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive#RecognitionofSponso rs As noted here, Corporate Sponsors have a BIG incentive to give due to the huge potential for brand exposure. This is a very low price for this kind of PR! If funds raised exceed these targets, then that may fund my ability to begin work on the far more difficult Phase 4 of the project. Contact Me Directly =================== If you are ready to send money, please contact me directly so we can figure out the details to minimize transaction costs and maximize the tax benefits to you. Fund Drive Totals ================= https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive The top of this page will say the current pledged and received totals. I think I screwed up my math earlier as I was confused by mail being sent to this list, directly to my mail, or to both. Far Future of K12Linux.org ========================== After K12Linux EL6 is mature, I want to work on the Next Generation replacement for LTSP. It is absolutely clear that EL6 will be the final supportable release of RH-based LTSP. If we are to have any Open Source terminal server solution later, it is going to based on some sort of VDI. I envision K12Linux.org will raise smaller amounts of money in future years to support the legacy EL6 distribution. Then using that community momentum, we will separately fund development of a modern VDI-based next generation replacement for the insecure and inefficient LTSP approach. The Open Source pieces to build this already exist in libvirt, virt-manager, kvm, and SPICE. It just would take a lot of work to integrate those pieces in a coherent way, wrap it in a new K12Linux branded management solution, and make it easy to deploy. Warren Togami warren at togami.com _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From news at siddall.name Sun May 22 18:32:49 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 14:32:49 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DD956D1.6050505@siddall.name> On 05/21/2011 10:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: > Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had > very poor speed, jerkiness etc. I wish there was something more I could say but literally I just fired up the thin client, logged into KDE and sound was there. I did absolutely nothing to make it happen. My clients are all various Atom boards with Intel chipsets if that makes a difference. Jeff From warren at togami.com Sun May 22 20:30:29 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 10:30:29 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> On 5/21/2011 4:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: > Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had > very poor speed, jerkiness etc. > > John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | > IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | What kind of client hardware do you have? What distro were you using? Warren From warren at togami.com Sun May 22 20:57:49 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 10:57:49 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Fund Drive : $750 Pledged from 11 Donors In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B79@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DD91759.5090509@togami.com> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B79@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DD978CD.4040903@togami.com> On 5/22/2011 8:26 AM, John Oligario wrote: > Bait and switch, lol > > John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | > IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | M 206.724.4556 Let's just say I'm being realistic. After years of asking this community in vain for volunteers to help in software development, I've received almost none. You folks are benefiting substantially from LTSP, and this is asking a tiny price for a stable and well maintained distro that receives updates through year 2017. The amount of work necessary amounts to less than minimum wage, especially since I am willing for the majority of donations to go to the charity, not myself. I'm surprised even this many people expressed willingness to donate. And this is without any effort to broadcast to the wider Fedora community or corporate sponsors. This seems achievable. Warren From news at siddall.name Sun May 22 20:58:10 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:58:10 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DD978E2.7020009@siddall.name> > What kind of client hardware do you have? Mostly Intel D945GSEJTs. I do have a few D945GCLFs, D510MOs and D410PTs, and even some VIA LN10000EGs also although I don't have speakers hooked up to any of those so I don't know if the sound works. > What distro were you using? Two systems, both F13. One has: # rpm -qa | grep ltsp ltsp-server-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 ltspfsd-0.5.13-1.fc12.i686 ltsp-vmclient-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 ltspfs-0.5.13-1.fc12.i686 vnc-ltsp-config-4.0-7.fc12.noarch ltsp-client-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 # rpm -q kdebase kdebase-4.5.4-1.fc13.i686 with a chroot: # cat /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/fedora-release Fedora release 13 (Goddard) The other: # rpm -qa | grep ltsp ltsp-vmclient-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 vnc-ltsp-config-4.0-7.fc12.noarch ltsp-server-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 ltspfsd-0.5.13-1.fc12.i686 ltsp-client-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 ltspfs-0.5.13-1.fc12.i686 # rpm -q kdebase kdebase-4.5.3-1.fc13.i686 with a chroot: # cat /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/fedora-release Fedora release 12 (Constantine) I also run mythfrontend as a localapp on the first system. The audio sync is a bit off there but I am guessing that is due to running it as a localapp because kmplayer player run on the server seems to have pretty good audio sync. Any tips on how to adjust audio delay on localapps would be much appreciated Hope that helps. Jeff From jomegat at jomegat.com Sun May 22 21:55:52 2011 From: jomegat at jomegat.com (Jomegat) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 17:55:52 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DD98668.7000608@jomegat.com> On 05/21/2011 01:51 AM, Burke Almquist wrote: > I guess my question is, who on the list is still using clients that aren't i686? > How many of them do you have, what are they, how long do you plan to keep using them, and are they even powerful enough for LTSP5? > Is lack of i586 support a deal breaker for anyone on the list, especially those who have pledged, or are considering pledging to this project? All six of my clients are 586's, and our teacher is agitating for Windows. Right now she's being told "there is no money," and I know that if I open the door of getting new HW, I will lose the software battle. But EL5 has been working for me, and maybe in three years things will be different. -- Jim Thomas jomegat at jomegat.com "And" is a word that should never be used at the beginning of a sentence. From johno at islandwood.org Sun May 22 22:45:11 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 15:45:11 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> Message-ID: <923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> Intel atom with one gig solid state and two gig ram. On May 22, 2011, at 1:32 PM, "Warren Togami Jr." wrote: > On 5/21/2011 4:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: >> Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had >> very poor speed, jerkiness etc. >> >> John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | >> IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | > > What kind of client hardware do you have? > > What distro were you using? > > Warren > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From burke at thealmquists.net Sun May 22 23:25:59 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 18:25:59 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal> <4DD97265.80908@togami.com> <923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> Message-ID: <51F449EE-C65A-45BB-A186-5F1C3496645D@thealmquists.net> >> On 5/21/2011 4:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: >>> Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had >>> very poor speed, jerkiness etc. >>> >>> John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | >>> IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | >> >> What kind of client hardware do you have? >> >> What distro were you using? >> Are you using Fedora? What version? From bfristen at shaw.ca Mon May 23 00:20:33 2011 From: bfristen at shaw.ca (Brian Fristensky) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 19:20:33 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <4DD98668.7000608@jomegat.com> References: <4DD72A31.9090308@siddall.name> <2475F88C-0E3A-49FC-95A9-F6E8A3B2E1C8@thealmquists.net> <4DD74683.1000502@cmosnetworks.com> <82BBFE7D-17BB-4DBC-A89F-0FF80222DC3D@thealmquists.net> <4DD74F83.9070709@cmosnetworks.com> <4B881B28-5153-418D-B025-06C234CD6892@thealmquists.net> <4DD98668.7000608@jomegat.com> Message-ID: <4DD9A851.6060007@shaw.ca> If you only have six clients, it may be easier to just find discarded i686's that you can get for free. Lots of people upgrade Windows machines after 3 - 4 years, and the discarded ones end up in the basement. Do you have any contacts at your local university or community college? Usually when they turn over computer labs, they have no place to get rid of the obsolete computers, and that can often mean anywhere from 20 to 50 machines that can no longer run a recent version of Windows, looking for a home. The advantage there is that usually, all machines will be exactly the same hardware, which simplifies things for LTSP. The other thing to try is to get whoever sends out newsletters at your school to send out a request for donations of i686 machines. All you need are six parents who want to get rid of an old machine. The important thing here is to circumvent the teacher who is whining for Windows by getting new donated computers for nothing - once again proving why the thin client/open source approach makes so much sense. A fait acompi will take the wind(ows) out of her sails. Jomegat wrote: > On 05/21/2011 01:51 AM, Burke Almquist wrote: >> I guess my question is, who on the list is still using clients that >> aren't i686? >> How many of them do you have, what are they, how long do you plan to >> keep using them, and are they even powerful enough for LTSP5? >> Is lack of i586 support a deal breaker for anyone on the list, >> especially those who have pledged, or are considering pledging to >> this project? > > All six of my clients are 586's, and our teacher is agitating for > Windows. Right now she's being told "there is no money," and I know > that if I open the door of getting new HW, I will lose the software > battle. But EL5 has been working for me, and maybe in three years > things will be different. > > From johno at islandwood.org Mon May 23 02:01:26 2011 From: johno at islandwood.org (John Oligario) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 19:01:26 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <51F449EE-C65A-45BB-A186-5F1C3496645D@thealmquists.net> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name><7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal><4DD97265.80908@togami.com><923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> <51F449EE-C65A-45BB-A186-5F1C3496645D@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B84@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Tried fedora, ubuntu, centos John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | M 206.724.4556 "The mission of IslandWood is to provide exceptional learning experiences and to inspire lifelong environmental and community stewardship." -----Original Message----- From: k12osn-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:k12osn-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Burke Almquist Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 4:26 PM To: Support list for open source software in schools. Subject: Re: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment >> On 5/21/2011 4:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: >>> Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had >>> very poor speed, jerkiness etc. >>> >>> John Oligario | Senior Information Systems Support Technician | >>> IslandWood | T 206.855.4308 | F 206.855.4301 | >> >> What kind of client hardware do you have? >> >> What distro were you using? >> Are you using Fedora? What version? _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see From burke at thealmquists.net Mon May 23 04:36:50 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 23:36:50 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B84@POSTINO.pselc.internal> References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name><7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal><4DD97265.80908@togami.com><923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> <51F449EE-C65A-45BB-A186-5F1C3496645D@thealmquists.net> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B84@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: The sound is delayed and jerky on all of them? On May 22, 2011, at 9:01 PM, John Oligario wrote: > Tried fedora, ubuntu, centos > > >>> On 5/21/2011 4:49 AM, John Oligario wrote: >>>> Perhaps explain to us how you got sound working properly, I have had >>>> very poor speed, jerkiness etc. From lesmikesell at gmail.com Mon May 23 12:51:45 2011 From: lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 07:51:45 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment In-Reply-To: References: <4DD7CE98.3050309@siddall.name><7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B64@POSTINO.pselc.internal><4DD97265.80908@togami.com><923E2C5F-A439-41AA-A7C1-5FEC8C4054F2@islandwood.org> <51F449EE-C65A-45BB-A186-5F1C3496645D@thealmquists.net> <7CD69867FCBA0F4694B0C053BF09331303776B84@POSTINO.pselc.internal> Message-ID: <4DDA5861.80403@gmail.com> On 5/22/11 11:36 PM, Burke Almquist wrote: > The sound is delayed and jerky on all of them? And did it happen with a single client running or was there some threshold number where it starts having problems? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com From cisna-barry at wc235.k12.il.us Tue May 24 18:08:31 2011 From: cisna-barry at wc235.k12.il.us (Barry Cisna) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 13:08:31 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites Message-ID: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> This is somewhat of a re posting from something I posted quite sometime back. Has anyone ever come up with a good thin client in the k12ltsp environment that works good with java intensive web sites. Case in point. If I try and browse searchtempest.com which is a crawler site for craigslist it brings the tc's we use to almost a standstill at some points. I know this shouldn't be a school used site,,but this is one of the most sluggish sites I have tried to use in the k12ltsp scenario. I/we have tried various versions of FF as well as upgrading/downgrading java versions and it appears versioning numbers makes very little difference in the TC's behaviour. Just curious if anyone has figured a good workaround other than running a fat client to circumvent this situation. Thanks, Barry From robark at gmail.com Tue May 24 18:49:15 2011 From: robark at gmail.com (Robert Arkiletian) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:49:15 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Barry Cisna wrote: > This is somewhat of a re posting from something I posted quite sometime > back. Has anyone ever come up with a good thin client in the k12ltsp > environment that works good with java intensive web sites. > Case in point. If I try and browse searchtempest.com which is a crawler Another site that *is* educational and is Java heavy is http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/new -- Robert Arkiletian Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada From bfristen at shaw.ca Tue May 24 21:20:23 2011 From: bfristen at shaw.ca (Brian Fristensky) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 16:20:23 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: <4DDC2117.7000207@shaw.ca> I tried this site. Browsing in SeaMonkey was fast. When I tried to launch simulations, JavaWebStart appeared to run, but no app ever popped up. I was able to download the jar files and run apps on the server, displaying on the TC, which worked well. (This is using LTSP5 on Fedora 13, 64-bit server and i686 TC). Network speed and server capacity aside, my experience with Java Web Start has been mixed. It has often been a flaky way to run applications. If there are specific programs you want students to run, it's probably more reliable to download the jar files to a world-readable directory and let them run them from there. Brian Fristensky Robert Arkiletian wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Barry Cisna > wrote: > >> This is somewhat of a re posting from something I posted quite sometime >> back. Has anyone ever come up with a good thin client in the k12ltsp >> environment that works good with java intensive web sites. >> Case in point. If I try and browse searchtempest.com which is a crawler >> > Another site that *is* educational and is Java heavy is > http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/new > > -- ============================================ Brian Fristensky 971 Somerville Avenue Winnipeg MB R3T 1B4 CANADA bfristen at shaw.ca 204-261-3960 ============================================ From warren at togami.com Tue May 24 21:47:20 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:47:20 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> Message-ID: <4DDC2768.107@togami.com> On 5/24/2011 8:49 AM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Barry Cisna > wrote: >> This is somewhat of a re posting from something I posted quite sometime >> back. Has anyone ever come up with a good thin client in the k12ltsp >> environment that works good with java intensive web sites. >> Case in point. If I try and browse searchtempest.com which is a crawler > > Another site that *is* educational and is Java heavy is > http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/new > Are these java apps eating multiple cores with threads? I just found a way to limit a user's session to a single CPU core. I will eventually make it an option for K12 deployments. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From jim.kinney at gmail.com Tue May 24 22:06:04 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 18:06:04 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: <4DDC2768.107@togami.com> References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> <4DDC2768.107@togami.com> Message-ID: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/24/2011 8:49 AM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: > >> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Barry Cisna >> wrote: >> >>> This is somewhat of a re posting from something I posted quite sometime >>> back. Has anyone ever come up with a good thin client in the k12ltsp >>> environment that works good with java intensive web sites. >>> Case in point. If I try and browse searchtempest.com which is a crawler >>> >> >> Another site that *is* educational and is Java heavy is >> http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/new >> >> > Are these java apps eating multiple cores with threads? I just found a way > to limit a user's session to a single CPU core. I will eventually make it > an option for K12 deployments. > Oooh! Oooh! Do tell!! Other than ulimits and pam_limits, I've found little to set boundaries on users eating the entire server. Little monster middle schoolers discovered fork bombs within 2 days of the servers going live. > > Warren Togami > warren at togami.com > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From warren at togami.com Tue May 24 22:18:20 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 12:18:20 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> <4DDC2768.107@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DDC2EAC.5020408@togami.com> On 5/24/2011 12:06 PM, Jim Kinney wrote: > > Are these java apps eating multiple cores with threads? I just > found a way to limit a user's session to a single CPU core. I will > eventually make it an option for K12 deployments. > > > Oooh! Oooh! Do tell!! Other than ulimits and pam_limits, I've found > little to set boundaries on users eating the entire server. Little > monster middle schoolers discovered fork bombs within 2 days of the > servers going live. > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/EL6Status *Nudge* =) $750 pledged from 11 donors. Warren From monteslu at cox.net Tue May 24 22:45:03 2011 From: monteslu at cox.net (Luis Montes) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:45:03 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] java intensive websites In-Reply-To: <4DDC2EAC.5020408@togami.com> References: <1306260511.3876.9.camel@hi2.wc235.k12.il.us> <4DDC2768.107@togami.com> <4DDC2EAC.5020408@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DDC34EF.4030401@cox.net> Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > On 5/24/2011 12:06 PM, Jim Kinney wrote: >> >> Are these java apps eating multiple cores with threads? I just >> found a way to limit a user's session to a single CPU core. I will >> eventually make it an option for K12 deployments. >> >> >> Oooh! Oooh! Do tell!! Other than ulimits and pam_limits, I've found >> little to set boundaries on users eating the entire server. Little >> monster middle schoolers discovered fork bombs within 2 days of the >> servers going live. >> > > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/EL6Status > *Nudge* =) > > $750 pledged from 11 donors. > > Warren > Make it $850 from 12 donors. I'm in for 100 You personally helped me a couple of years ago with a k12 fedora9 install. I owe you at least that much. Thanks, Luis From warren at togami.com Tue May 24 23:41:59 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 13:41:59 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] $850 Pledged from 12 Donors Message-ID: <4DDC4247.80407@togami.com> Hi folks, https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/2011FundDrive This page describes the current plans. https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/EL6Status This page describes the current status. Now accepting donations via Bitcoin address 1K833U5CBaKkNbvaY4wKbjoauJVKCDh4GF. Not a preferred method. I have no idea if this Bitcoin thing is actually worth anything, but if you happen to have some, it's better than nothing. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 25 03:03:06 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 22:03:06 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] EL6 Status TODOs Message-ID: <7F4CD4A5-F0CE-4457-88DF-70D829564FA2@thealmquists.net> > (MODERATE) Network Configuration documentation sucks so much that it confused even Warren as he forgot how to add an ethX to the ltspbr0 bridge manually. May require development of better tools to make it less of a crappy manual configuration process. Were you looking at this? https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/NetworkSetup If anyone has suggestions for making this clearer, please feel free to share. No matter how good the setup tool is, we have no way of knowing if they are using one, two, or more network cards, using VLANS, using a windows DHCP server, etc. I think that is why we stuck with manual configuration using a bridge, it's also one reason the documentation is so crappy and confusing, since there are so many possible scenarios to cover. From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 25 03:39:51 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 22:39:51 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] LTSP on EL5 Message-ID: <6020767F-9C92-48E8-A9A9-16C0E27B5511@thealmquists.net> For those who are running LTSP 4.2 (or 5 if you have it working) would you mind letting me know. I'd like to clean up the documentation on that for people with older clients that might not be supported on EL6. This is important is the www.k12ltsp.org site is no longer with us. I figure we could squeeze a page onto the k12linux wiki. From warren at togami.com Wed May 25 11:51:17 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 01:51:17 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] EL6 Status TODOs In-Reply-To: <7F4CD4A5-F0CE-4457-88DF-70D829564FA2@thealmquists.net> References: <7F4CD4A5-F0CE-4457-88DF-70D829564FA2@thealmquists.net> Message-ID: <4DDCED35.1050909@togami.com> On 5/24/2011 5:03 PM, Burke Almquist wrote: >> (MODERATE) Network Configuration documentation sucks so much that >> it confused even Warren as he forgot how to add an ethX to the >> ltspbr0 bridge manually. May require development of better tools to >> make it less of a crappy manual configuration process. > > Were you looking at this? > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/NetworkSetup > > If anyone has suggestions for making this clearer, please feel free > to share. > > No matter how good the setup tool is, we have no way of knowing if > they are using one, two, or more network cards, using VLANS, using a > windows DHCP server, etc. I think that is why we stuck with manual > configuration using a bridge, it's also one reason the documentation > is so crappy and confusing, since there are so many possible > scenarios to cover. To make matters worse, they removed the GUI system-config-network from EL6. The existing documentation describes using that tool to write out an almost-complete config file for the desired ethX device. But now that we have no tool to do that, I had to manually write a config file that pulled in the correct ethX device details, MAC address and other parameters including NM_CONTROLLED=no so NetworkManager ignores the device. The new documentation would be pretty complicated in describing how to choose your ethX devices to attach to ltspbr0 and how to write the config manually. Warren From cfiaime at cfiaime.com Wed May 25 17:54:08 2011 From: cfiaime at cfiaime.com (Jeffrey Williams) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 11:54:08 -0600 Subject: [K12OSN] Configuring video for DevonIT TC-2c terminals Message-ID: <1306346048.4ddd424041a8a@webmail.no-ip.com> Greetings, I'm trying to configure the video drivers for the DevonIT TC-2c terminals so to possibly use a direct rendering for running a couple of graphics applications. According to the LTSP administration manual, I should be able to designate the driver (the chip set is VIA 700CN) in the /var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386/lts.conf file. When doing so, the terminal hangs. With the default (non GLX) drivers, the terminal comes up, but glxgears and Blender won't run because of video mode problems. Any thoughts on how to troubleshoot this? Thanks. jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com From burke at thealmquists.net Wed May 25 21:10:09 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (burke at thealmquists.net) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:10:09 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] K12Linux EL6 Preliminary Feasibility Assessment Message-ID: <9fgt687lv5fksnxvhbmxgedp.1306357809375@email.android.com> Did you ever figure out this sound issue? If not, what are you using as your server. Les Mikesell wrote: >On 5/22/11 11:36 PM, Burke Almquist wrote: >> The sound is delayed and jerky on all of them? > >And did it happen with a single client running or was there some threshold >number where it starts having problems? > >-- > Les Mikesell > lesmikesell at gmail.com > > >_______________________________________________ >K12OSN mailing list >K12OSN at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >For more info see From julius at turtle.com Wed May 25 22:22:15 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 18:22:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: <4DDD72EE.2070207@togami.com> Message-ID: Dear Folks, I decided to to increase my pledge by $100 as a matching donation if someone new by the end of Friday pledges $100. Julius From dyoung at mesd.k12.or.us Wed May 25 23:01:24 2011 From: dyoung at mesd.k12.or.us (Dan Young) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:01:24 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: References: <4DDD72EE.2070207@togami.com> Message-ID: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > Dear Folks, > ? ? ? ?I decided to to increase my pledge by $100 as a matching > donation if someone new by the end of Friday pledges $100. Nice! I'll take you up on that and pledge $100. -- Dan Young Multnomah ESD - Technology Services 503-257-1562 From warren at togami.com Thu May 26 04:31:29 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 18:31:29 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: References: <4DDD72EE.2070207@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DDDD7A1.6060507@togami.com> On 5/25/2011 1:01 PM, Dan Young wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: >> Dear Folks, >> I decided to to increase my pledge by $100 as a matching >> donation if someone new by the end of Friday pledges $100. > > Nice! I'll take you up on that and pledge $100. > Great! Thank you! How do you want to transfer? ============================ * Bank of America allows transfers between account holders for free. Do you have a Bank of America account? * Personal Check mailed would be the next best option. Who do you want to receive credit? ================================== Do you want your name or your employer to be mentioned in the credits of k12linux.org? Who do you want to receive the contribution? ============================================ * Warren is soon a grad student with no income... help feed Warren. In this case there is no tax deduction unless you happen to have a business, then you can write it off as a business expense. * Donate to my designated 501(c)3 charity. In that case they'll send you a receipt so you can benefit with a tax deduction. I am happy if you pay me or them, either way is great. In this case you would need to mail a check written out to "Honolulu Community Concert Band". Let me know what choices you have made. Thanks, Warren Togami warren at togami.com From julius at turtle.com Thu May 26 12:56:32 2011 From: julius at turtle.com (Julius Szelagiewicz) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 08:56:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [K12OSN] Pledge Drive for K12Linux EL6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 May 2011, Dan Young wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: > > Dear Folks, > > ? ? ? ?I decided to to increase my pledge by $100 as a matching > > donation if someone new by the end of Friday pledges $100. > > Nice! I'll take you up on that and pledge $100. > Dan, thank you! $200 already sent to Warren. Julius From burke at thealmquists.net Thu May 26 18:15:37 2011 From: burke at thealmquists.net (Burke Almquist) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 13:15:37 -0500 Subject: [K12OSN] Configuring video for DevonIT TC-2c terminals In-Reply-To: <1306346048.4ddd424041a8a@webmail.no-ip.com> References: <1306346048.4ddd424041a8a@webmail.no-ip.com> Message-ID: On May 25, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Jeffrey Williams wrote: > Greetings, > > I'm trying to configure the video drivers for the DevonIT TC-2c terminals so to possibly use a direct rendering for running a couple of graphics applications. According to the LTSP administration manual, I should be able to designate the driver (the chip set is VIA 700CN) in the /var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386/lts.conf file. When doing so, the terminal hangs. With the default (non GLX) drivers, the terminal comes up, but glxgears and Blender won't run because of video mode problems. > Isn't this detected by default? You shouldn't need to specify the video chipset in the lts.conf file. Isn't there a way to add the card's pci id to a list to it autodetects correctly? > Any thoughts on how to troubleshoot this? > > Thanks. > > jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From warren at togami.com Fri May 27 01:00:24 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 15:00:24 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Brainstorming: Naming the Future K12 Distros Message-ID: <4DDEF7A8.2020606@togami.com> How does this sound... K12Linux.org is the umbrella project. K12LTSP EL6 will be this upcoming release of LTSP v5.x for EL6. This will be named as such to differentiate it from future non-LTSP terminal server stuff from k12linux.org. K12 EL6 will be the future SPICE VDI terminal server based on EL6. (With some clever design I might be able to make it so you can have both LTSP and SPICE clients sharing the same NFS homedirs.) But what should this new SPICE VDI K12 distro be named? K12Linux? K12VDI? K12Spice? Warren Togami warren at togami.com From news at siddall.name Fri May 27 01:50:19 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:50:19 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Brainstorming: Naming the Future K12 Distros In-Reply-To: <4DDEF7A8.2020606@togami.com> References: <4DDEF7A8.2020606@togami.com> Message-ID: <4DDF035B.2060405@siddall.name> On 05/26/2011 09:00 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: > How does this sound... > > K12Linux.org is the umbrella project. > > K12LTSP EL6 will be this upcoming release of LTSP v5.x for EL6. This > will be named as such to differentiate it from future non-LTSP terminal > server stuff from k12linux.org. > > K12 EL6 will be the future SPICE VDI terminal server > based on EL6. (With some clever design I might be able to make it so > you can have both LTSP and SPICE clients sharing the same NFS homedirs.) > > But what should this new SPICE VDI K12 distro be named? > > K12Linux? > K12VDI? > K12Spice? Since this distro is useful for a lot more than just education how about dropping the K12 part and just calling it SpiceLinux or SpiceLTSP? Jeff From cfiaime at cfiaime.com Fri May 27 16:09:34 2011 From: cfiaime at cfiaime.com (Jeffrey Williams) Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 10:09:34 -0600 Subject: [K12OSN] Configuring DevonIT TC-2c Message-ID: <1306512574.4ddfccbebb007@webmail.no-ip.com> Greetings, According to some older (2009?) LTSP posts, the system has difficulty auto-detecting the VIA chipset, thus defaulting to the slower VESA video driver. This will not be a problem until we start working with Blender some time late this year. But seeing I don't have students yet, I want to get this resolved. According to the documentation, I should be able to put XSERVER = via into the lts.conf file, but when I do that the terminal hangs for hours -- how long, I don't know because I get impatient letting it sit more than overnight. I also can't seem to find the X log files for the thin client, which might help in trouble shooting. jeff williams - cfiaime at cfiaime.com At Friday, 05/27/2011 on 10:00 k12osn-request at redhat.com wrote: > On May 25, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Jeffrey Williams wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > > I'm trying to configure the video drivers for the DevonIT TC-2c terminals so to possibly use a direct rendering for running a couple of graphics applications. According to the LTSP administration manual, I should be able to designate the driver (the chip set is VIA 700CN) in the /var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386/lts.conf file. When doing so, the terminal hangs. With the default (non GLX) drivers, the terminal comes up, but glxgears and Blender won't run because of video mode problems. > > > > Isn't this detected by default? You shouldn't need to specify the video chipset in the lts.conf file. > > Isn't there a way to add the card's pci id to a list to it autodetects correctly? From warren at togami.com Sat May 28 12:03:19 2011 From: warren at togami.com (Warren Togami Jr.) Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 02:03:19 -1000 Subject: [K12OSN] Configuring DevonIT TC-2c In-Reply-To: <1306512574.4ddfccbebb007@webmail.no-ip.com> References: <1306512574.4ddfccbebb007@webmail.no-ip.com> Message-ID: <4DE0E487.9080900@togami.com> On 5/27/2011 6:09 AM, Jeffrey Williams wrote: > Greetings, > > According to some older (2009?) LTSP posts, the system has difficulty > auto-detecting the VIA chipset, thus defaulting to the slower VESA > video driver. This will not be a problem until we start working with > Blender some time late this year. But seeing I don't have students > yet, I want to get this resolved. > > According to the documentation, I should be able to put XSERVER = via > into the lts.conf file, but when I do that the terminal hangs for > hours -- how long, I don't know because I get impatient letting it > sit more than overnight. > > I also can't seem to find the X log files for the thin client, which > might help in trouble shooting. > Are you sure it is even possible to use the 3D capability of any VIA chipset in Linux? My knowledge is about a year old, but I've NEVER seen a working Open Source VIA driver work with accelerated 3D. Warren Togami warren at togami.com From reb at taco.com Sun May 29 14:36:05 2011 From: reb at taco.com (Phydeaux) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 10:36:05 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] How can I force ltsp clients to power off? Message-ID: <73a9f31cae5a3be4b6e679a23ded8f51.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> Hi! After spending a couple of hours cleaning the dust out of our client machines and reading the discussions here about power savings, it occurs to me that I'm missing something. Despite my encouraging both students and teachers to turn off our client machines at the end of each day, nothing is ever turned off. How can I force our ltsp client machines to power off? I'm happy to pick a timeframe of two or three hours of inactivity. At that point I don't really care what the machine is doing -- I just want it off. I would imagine that there is some way to set this within the client image (not that I care where it is set). I've done some digging and have not found any way of doing this, though. We're running ltsp5 on Fedora 13, if it matters. Help! reb From jim.kinney at gmail.com Sun May 29 14:46:25 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 10:46:25 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] How can I force ltsp clients to power off? In-Reply-To: <73a9f31cae5a3be4b6e679a23ded8f51.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> References: <73a9f31cae5a3be4b6e679a23ded8f51.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> Message-ID: shutdown -h now from a cron job on the server that's run on each client. The server should have ssh keys installed for root onto the clients so it's pretty easy to script up a shutdown process. Alternatively, add a cronjob in the /etc/crontab for the clients that shuts down daily at say, 8 pm. But then you must have time synched properly. On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Phydeaux wrote: > Hi! > > After spending a couple of hours cleaning the dust out of our client > machines > and reading the discussions here about power savings, it occurs to me that > I'm missing something. Despite my encouraging both students and teachers > to > turn off our client machines at the end of each day, nothing is ever turned > off. > > How can I force our ltsp client machines to power off? I'm happy to pick a > timeframe of two or three hours of inactivity. At that point I don't really > care what the machine is doing -- I just want it off. I would imagine that > there is some way to set this within the client image (not that I care > where it is set). I've done some digging and have not found any way of > doing this, though. > > We're running ltsp5 on Fedora 13, if it matters. > > Help! > > reb > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From k12ltsp at rwcinc.net Sun May 29 15:11:45 2011 From: k12ltsp at rwcinc.net (Patrick Fleming) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 08:11:45 -0700 Subject: [K12OSN] How can I force ltsp clients to power off? In-Reply-To: References: <73a9f31cae5a3be4b6e679a23ded8f51.squirrel@webmail.taco.com> Message-ID: <4DE26231.4050406@rwcinc.net> I had to do all of the following to get my workstations to shutdown on a schedule. Mine shutdown overnight, you may want to shutdown earlier and may need to get some different input so that the machine will do this based on idle time not time of day. I only have a few workstations so I just run workstation 1 through 10. I'm running LTSP 4.2 on CentOS version 5.5 and this works for me. ltspinfo is from ltsp-utils-0.25-4.fc6 lts.conf ALLOW_SHUTDOWN = Y Cron job 06 0 * * * root /usr/local/bin/ws-shutdown /usr/local/bin/ws-shutdown !/bin/bash START=2 END=10 for i in `seq ${START} ${END}`; do /usr/bin/ltspinfo --host=192.168.1.${i} --shutdown &>/dev/null sleep 20 done On 05/29/11 07:46, Jim Kinney wrote: > shutdown -h now from a cron job on the server that's run on each client. The > server should have ssh keys installed for root onto the clients so it's > pretty easy to script up a shutdown process. > > Alternatively, add a cronjob in the /etc/crontab for the clients that shuts > down daily at say, 8 pm. But then you must have time synched properly. > > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Phydeaux wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> After spending a couple of hours cleaning the dust out of our client >> machines >> and reading the discussions here about power savings, it occurs to me that >> I'm missing something. Despite my encouraging both students and teachers >> to >> turn off our client machines at the end of each day, nothing is ever turned >> off. >> >> How can I force our ltsp client machines to power off? I'm happy to pick a >> timeframe of two or three hours of inactivity. At that point I don't really >> care what the machine is doing -- I just want it off. I would imagine that >> there is some way to set this within the client image (not that I care >> where it is set). I've done some digging and have not found any way of >> doing this, though. >> >> We're running ltsp5 on Fedora 13, if it matters. >> >> Help! >> >> reb >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see From news at siddall.name Mon May 30 14:47:18 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 10:47:18 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Server sending excessive "GetProperty" requests Message-ID: <4DE3ADF6.2090509@siddall.name> I have one client system which otherwise seems to be behaving normally but is sending a lot of data -- like a steady 30 Mbps -- to the server. It appears to be sending as fast as it's CPU will let it as top shows X taking 99% of the CPU. The large amount of data seems to be caused by "X11, Request, opcode: 20 (GetProperty)" packets from the server to which the client replies with either small (empty) replies or huge ~14 kB replies (approx. 9 full Ethernet packets). These GetProperty requests go out from the server about every 1-2 milliseconds which causes big replies from the client about every 4 ms -- thus a ton of bandwidth. The big replies seem to have a bunch of info about application windows but most of these are not currently running on the client. Here's a brief excerpt of one of the large reply packets: ml*borderWidth:0 ml*focusPolicy:pointer ml*foreground:#1b1918 ml*helpwin*textSW.text.background:#ffffff ml*helpwin*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 ml*highlightColor:#d5d1cf ml*log*textSW.text.background:#ffffff ml*log*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 ml*marginHeight:2 ml*marginWidth:3 ml*selectColor:#d5d1cf ml*textSW.text.background:#ffffff ml*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 ml.form.height:550 ml.form.width:650 nedit*background:#d5d1cf nedit*foreground:#1b1918 xcalc*background:#d5d1cf xcalc*bevel.screen.LCD.background:#ffffff xcalc*bevel.screen.LCD.foreground:#1b1918 xcalc*foreground:#1b1918 xdvi.background:white xosview*background:#d5d1cf xosview*foreground:#1b1918 xosview*meterLabelColor:#1b1918 xosview*usedLabelColor:#1b1918 xpdf.background:#d5d1cf xpdf.foreground:#1b1918 xpdf.urlCommand:kfmclient exec %s xterm*background:#ffffff xterm*foreground:#1b1918 xterm.SimpleMenu*background:#d5d1cf xterm.SimpleMenu*foreground:#1b1918 Since it is the server requesting all this info hundreds of times per second I am guessing something is wrong on the server side, but how do I figure out what? Here is what is installed: Server: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.8.2-4.fc13.i686 ltsp-server-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 Client: xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.8.2-4.fc13.i686 ltsp-client-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 Any help would be appreciated. Jeff From jim.kinney at gmail.com Mon May 30 15:21:01 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 11:21:01 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Server sending excessive "GetProperty" requests In-Reply-To: <4DE3ADF6.2090509@siddall.name> References: <4DE3ADF6.2090509@siddall.name> Message-ID: Does this continue after it's rebooted? A corrupted memory stack or flaky network connection are high likely culprits. Both maybe overheating chipset symptoms. On May 30, 2011 10:53 AM, "Jeff Siddall" wrote: > I have one client system which otherwise seems to be behaving normally > but is sending a lot of data -- like a steady 30 Mbps -- to the server. > It appears to be sending as fast as it's CPU will let it as top shows X > taking 99% of the CPU. > > The large amount of data seems to be caused by "X11, Request, opcode: 20 > (GetProperty)" packets from the server to which the client replies with > either small (empty) replies or huge ~14 kB replies (approx. 9 full > Ethernet packets). > > These GetProperty requests go out from the server about every 1-2 > milliseconds which causes big replies from the client about every 4 ms > -- thus a ton of bandwidth. > > The big replies seem to have a bunch of info about application windows > but most of these are not currently running on the client. Here's a > brief excerpt of one of the large reply packets: > > ml*borderWidth:0 > ml*focusPolicy:pointer > ml*foreground:#1b1918 > ml*helpwin*textSW.text.background:#ffffff > ml*helpwin*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 > ml*highlightColor:#d5d1cf > ml*log*textSW.text.background:#ffffff > ml*log*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 > ml*marginHeight:2 > ml*marginWidth:3 > ml*selectColor:#d5d1cf > ml*textSW.text.background:#ffffff > ml*textSW.text.foreground:#1b1918 > ml.form.height:550 > ml.form.width:650 > nedit*background:#d5d1cf > nedit*foreground:#1b1918 > xcalc*background:#d5d1cf > xcalc*bevel.screen.LCD.background:#ffffff > xcalc*bevel.screen.LCD.foreground:#1b1918 > xcalc*foreground:#1b1918 > xdvi.background:white > xosview*background:#d5d1cf > xosview*foreground:#1b1918 > xosview*meterLabelColor:#1b1918 > xosview*usedLabelColor:#1b1918 > xpdf.background:#d5d1cf > xpdf.foreground:#1b1918 > xpdf.urlCommand:kfmclient exec %s > xterm*background:#ffffff > xterm*foreground:#1b1918 > xterm.SimpleMenu*background:#d5d1cf > xterm.SimpleMenu*foreground:#1b1918 > > Since it is the server requesting all this info hundreds of times per > second I am guessing something is wrong on the server side, but how do I > figure out what? > > Here is what is installed: > > Server: > xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.8.2-4.fc13.i686 > ltsp-server-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 > > Client: > xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.8.2-4.fc13.i686 > ltsp-client-5.1.95-1.fc13.i686 > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From news at siddall.name Mon May 30 16:11:37 2011 From: news at siddall.name (Jeff Siddall) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 12:11:37 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Server sending excessive "GetProperty" requests In-Reply-To: References: <4DE3ADF6.2090509@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DE3C1B9.4010706@siddall.name> On 05/30/2011 11:21 AM, Jim Kinney wrote: > Does this continue after it's rebooted? A corrupted memory stack or > flaky network connection are high likely culprits. Both maybe > overheating chipset symptoms. Client reboot seemed to fix it. It's not likely an overheating issue -- I have a bunch of these clients deployed and they run pretty cool. Corrupt memory or software bug I guess. Jeff From jim.kinney at gmail.com Mon May 30 16:21:02 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 12:21:02 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Server sending excessive "GetProperty" requests In-Reply-To: <4DE3C1B9.4010706@siddall.name> References: <4DE3ADF6.2090509@siddall.name> <4DE3C1B9.4010706@siddall.name> Message-ID: Cosmic ray ionized air next to ram and caused a few bits to flip. ECC ram helps this but things can still go wonky. IBM did a study on cosmic ray damage to computer memory and they were astounded at the failure rate. That's why IBM servers have such thick metal cases made from steel and not aluminum. On May 30, 2011 12:14 PM, "Jeff Siddall" wrote: > On 05/30/2011 11:21 AM, Jim Kinney wrote: >> Does this continue after it's rebooted? A corrupted memory stack or >> flaky network connection are high likely culprits. Both maybe >> overheating chipset symptoms. > > Client reboot seemed to fix it. It's not likely an overheating issue -- > I have a bunch of these clients deployed and they run pretty cool. > Corrupt memory or software bug I guess. > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlists at disklessworkstations.com Mon May 30 20:17:24 2011 From: mlists at disklessworkstations.com (DisklessWorkstations.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 16:17:24 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Brainstorming: Naming the Future K12 Distros In-Reply-To: <4DDF035B.2060405@siddall.name> References: <4DDEF7A8.2020606@togami.com> <4DDF035B.2060405@siddall.name> Message-ID: <4DE3FB54.2060706@disklessworkstations.com> On 05/26/2011 09:50 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > On 05/26/2011 09:00 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> How does this sound... >> >> K12Linux.org is the umbrella project. >> >> K12LTSP EL6 will be this upcoming release of LTSP v5.x for EL6. This >> will be named as such to differentiate it from future non-LTSP terminal >> server stuff from k12linux.org. >> >> K12 EL6 will be the future SPICE VDI terminal server >> based on EL6. (With some clever design I might be able to make it so >> you can have both LTSP and SPICE clients sharing the same NFS homedirs.) >> >> But what should this new SPICE VDI K12 distro be named? >> >> K12Linux? >> K12VDI? >> K12Spice? > Since this distro is useful for a lot more than just education how about > dropping the K12 part and just calling it SpiceLinux or SpiceLTSP? > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see I agree with the point in regard to more uses than just K-12. How about SpiceV or SpiceVD? v for virtual d for desktop Alex DisklessWorkstations.com From jim.kinney at gmail.com Mon May 30 20:40:23 2011 From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 16:40:23 -0400 Subject: [K12OSN] Brainstorming: Naming the Future K12 Distros In-Reply-To: <4DE3FB54.2060706@disklessworkstations.com> References: <4DDEF7A8.2020606@togami.com> <4DDF035B.2060405@siddall.name> <4DE3FB54.2060706@disklessworkstations.com> Message-ID: SpiceVD?!?!? Are you serious?!?!? Sounds like something no one will want to catch! SpiceV or SpiceVS or SpiceD work or SpiceDE (Desktop Environment) On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:17 PM, DisklessWorkstations.com < mlists at disklessworkstations.com> wrote: > On 05/26/2011 09:50 PM, Jeff Siddall wrote: > >> On 05/26/2011 09:00 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote: >> >>> How does this sound... >>> >>> K12Linux.org is the umbrella project. >>> >>> K12LTSP EL6 will be this upcoming release of LTSP v5.x for EL6. This >>> will be named as such to differentiate it from future non-LTSP terminal >>> server stuff from k12linux.org. >>> >>> K12 EL6 will be the future SPICE VDI terminal server >>> based on EL6. (With some clever design I might be able to make it so >>> you can have both LTSP and SPICE clients sharing the same NFS homedirs.) >>> >>> But what should this new SPICE VDI K12 distro be named? >>> >>> K12Linux? >>> K12VDI? >>> K12Spice? >>> >> Since this distro is useful for a lot more than just education how about >> dropping the K12 part and just calling it SpiceLinux or SpiceLTSP? >> >> Jeff >> >> _______________________________________________ >> K12OSN mailing list >> K12OSN at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn >> For more info see >> > I agree with the point in regard to more uses than just K-12. > > How about SpiceV or SpiceVD? v for virtual d for desktop > > Alex > DisklessWorkstations.com > > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > K12OSN at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see > -- -- James P. Kinney III As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome. - *2011 Noam Chomsky* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: