[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] Preparing K12Linux F11



Jeff Siddall wrote:
It seems like there are two user communities here.  One has legacy
hardware (like 486 machines, with no 64 bit servers) and the other,
which is the group I belong to, has modern hardware -- exclusively 64
bit servers and generally 586+ clients.

Given that there is a decade, or perhaps more, of Moore's law separating
the two groups it's pretty tough to make both happy!

My impression as a relatively new K12Linux user is that it is perhaps
the most bleeding edge of all LTSP distros, largely due to the fact that
it is based on the latest Fedora, which is one of the most bleeding edge
distros.  As such, K12Linux really does not seem like the right place to
try to support legacy hardware.

Further, LTSP5 is perhaps the wrong version to base a legacy hardware
LTSP distro on, given it's significantly increased resource requirements
from LTSP4.

Two solutions for supporting legacy hardware come to mind.  One is for
"someone" to continue to maintain a LTSP4 based distribution on an OS
with long term support (ie: CentOS).  The other is for "someone" to
create a custom K12Linux spin that takes out a lot of the weight of
K12Linux and optimizes it for legacy hardware.  Not sure of the
viability of these, or who the magical "someone" might be.

Thoughts?

Fortunately, we already have an excellent LTSP4-based distro today, and that's K12LTSP 5EL, which will be supported until the year 2014. I'd suggest that any CentOS 6-based K12Linux also include LTSP 4 as an optional "for legacy hardware" installatation. The Fedora releases should stay bleeding edge, because that's the whole point of Fedora.

But now we're getting to a point where LTSP might no longer be a good business case.

The whole point of LTSP was to be able to reuse old computers as thin clients to save both money and the environment. IIRC, for a time, Jim McQuillan himself even resold Dell OptiPlex GX1's as a thin-client option not so long ago. If we're now going toward super-powerful (and increasingly expensive) thin client hardware, then we have a problem. As a buyer, I'd be better off spending the extra $20 for a full-fledged PC and install my choice of distro on the hard disk (Ghost, Kickstart, however). Oh, and I just saved the expense of buying an LTSP server. Whoops....

Here's an example of what I mean.

http://www.zareason.com/shop/product.php?productid=16183&cat=249&page=1

--TP


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]