On 20/01/2017 08:54 πμ, Luis Guzmán wrote: > Seen that you recommend i3 as light clients, which are kind of > expensive around here, i wonder, why not just make standalone > installations?, I've come to an answer of to take care of administrative > tasks. > Then, should LTSP be seen as an administrative software for other > machines?, such as Puppet or some other administrative platforms.
1) Selecting the client CPU and RAM is exactly the same for standalone workstations and LTSP fat clients. If J1900 is good enough for you, fine. If you want i3, use i3. There's nothing "light" in this; it's normal workstations in all cases. You can also consult your distro recommended requirements. 2) Selecting LTSP saves you from buying client hard disks, so it's a bit cheaper on hardware. 3) In LTSP fat clients, you don't need a beefy and expensive server; a normal workstation will do fine. 4) The main benefit of LTSP in the fat client use case is the central administration, yes. You only maintain one installation instead of many. For example, to replace one client with standalone workstations you'd need to install the OS, to install and configure all the applications, to join your central user database (e.g. ldap), to deploy /home etc. With LTSP you just netboot a diskless client, i.e. you're done in seconds instead of hours/days. Even if you used a perfect (and complicated) puppet setup, you wouldn't be done in seconds. So yup LTSP is mainly about extremely easy maintenance of a computer lab. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _____________________________________________________________________ Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net
