morgan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 18:29, Daniel Drake <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Greg Smith <[email protected]> > > wrote: ... > >> The biggest challenge I see is to find those things which you do not want > >> to > >> "clone" from the source XO. The only things that come to mind are Name and > >> Color. We could even pre-fill them as long as those dialog boxes come up > >> at > >> start up. > > > > There is a lot more than that - it's things that are invisible to the > > user, technical details of the system, which are the bits we don't > > have a good answer for. For example (an easy one), keys are generated > > on first boot, but it is potentially bad news down the line if > > multiple XOs have the same keys. The hard part is tracking these > > things, which are not specified anywhere and there's no one place you ... > I believe the mail from Michael that you were looking for is > http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-March/012200.html - and > http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-April/012957.html is > probably also relevant. > > The keys generated in ~/.sugar/default/ are AFAIK not used for crypto, > but are used to generate the unique Jabber ID (JID). If two XOs (or > Sugar clients) have the same keys, Strange Bad Things happen to > presence and collaboration.
ssh host keys are probably generated on first boot as well. with partitioning support, it should be possible to have a r.o. root overlaid by a unionfs writeable mount, so machine-specific changes don't modify the released partition. this would make cloning quite a bit easier, i'd think. i have no idea what the performance hit of a unionfs setup would be, nor how such a partitioning would fit into the rest of the update strategy (e.g. olpc-update). paul =--------------------- paul fox, [email protected] give one laptop, get one laptop --- http://www.laptop.com/xo _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
