On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:28:06AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Samuel Greenfeld <sam...@greenfeld.org> wrote: > > The obvious counterargument would be that a deployment might want > > to deploy your XO-Next (whatever it is) alongside existing XO > > laptops, allowing all of them to have the same configuration. > > From my memory of olpc-os-builder it was very modular and wouldn't be > hard to add dozens of different devices support to it.
Yes, it would be straightforward to add commodity hardware support to olpc-os-builder. Add kernel and boot loader. Add some sort of installer. But we have SoaS, and SoaS works fine on commodity hardware, so why bother with olpc-os-builder? Because olpc-update? Nobody uses it. Because preinstalled activities? SoaS can do that too. > > There's plenty of blame to go around in terms of re-inventing the wheel and > > lack of communication. > > Yep! > > > There simply (and correct me if I'm wrong) are not the resources inside of > > OLPC, outside, or combined at this time to maintain and update two separate > > builds & build systems. > > > > It amazes me how far we bend over backwards to avoid saying "end of life" > > and "end of support". > > > > > > I have seen a fair amount of interest, both publicly and privately, for > > newer XO laptop builds. But I don't think the requesters realize how much > > work it takes to make one. > > The big one here is kernel kernel kernel. Yes. > > And I do not forsee anyone stepping up to get the XO-1.75 and XO-4 kernel & > > drivers into a state they can be upstreamed or upgraded for newer Fedoras > > unless a deployment really wants this instead of newer equipment. > > Or even the 1.5, I believe most of the XO-1 support is upsteream. > > > Newer operating systems tend to require more disk space and RAM than the > > predecessors. We have seen this even within Fedora's lineage. > > Yes, and no. I mean 1Gb of the original XO-1 is tight, but SoaS still > happily fits in 4Gb with a bunch of space to spare. Looking at my > current SoaS VM the used space is around 1.9Gb. Amusingly the various > cloud/container enterprise initiatives actively help us here because > for once they care about dependency bloat too :-) > > The two things that add bloat to the current SoaS image are: > * Browse needs to be converted to the new WebKitGtk APIs so we don't > ship two copies of WebKitGtk. > * Conversion of remaining gstreamer 0.10 to 1.0 to allow us not to ship that. > > Ultimately I think you could with a little development effort get it > down to 1.5Gb used space which would make a 2Gb filesystem quite > usable. > > > Since OLPC already appears to be going the Ubuntu LTS route, I would argue > > it would be easiest to take everything that way, porting utilities as > > required, and make that the final image & build system for XOs. > > Personally I have no interest in that. I wish you luck. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
