[K12OSN] Plans for K12Linux EL6 and Future Fedora
Terrell Prude' Jr.
microman at cmosnetworks.com
Sun May 8 19:30:13 UTC 2011
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. <warren at togami.com
> <mailto:%22Warren%20Togami%20Jr.%22%20%3cwarren at togami.com%3e>>
> *Reply-to*: "Support list for open source software in schools."
> <k12osn at redhat.com>
> *To*: K12LTSP <k12osn at redhat.com
> <mailto:K12LTSP%20%3ck12osn at redhat.com%3e>>
> *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 <mailto:warren at togami.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12OSN mailing list
> K12OSN at redhat.com <mailto:K12OSN at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12OSN mailing list
> K12OSN at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
More information about the K12OSN
mailing list