Hello Tom, On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 07:30:27AM -0600, Tom Griffing wrote: > Pascal; > > Seems like you're asking for quite a different thing. > If you want to bundle the runtime environment into > the initrd image, then you'll likely end up with a > large image. This will extend the boot time, since > the image is retrieved by tftp.
Yes, you're right, but, if I understand, the LTSP solution for local apps needs NFS along the time you use the applications, with initrd and cloop we need to use the network only for the tftpboot and after not, if I misunderstand the LTPS local apps NFS requirement, can you explain it to me, I know that my bad English some times run me in mistakes :-). Only the kernel will be in the initrd, after booting the kernel mount a compressed system in ramdisk, for compression cloop is used ( if I understand ..... ;-) ), but this is always as you says for the boot time. > You'll have to have > a *lot* of RAM on the terminals to decompress the > image. Yes, I know, what I'm trying to do is a little Debian. (see below) and the cloop will avoid the decompression. > > If you can't use NFS because of network constraints, > this would be bad as well, if you're serious about > throwing java into the image as well. I don't think > this would work at all. Yes, I've to run a Java client application, about 40 Mo after decompressing , I hope that I can make this, Debian and Java application less than 400 Mo. At the moment I can make a distro with debootstrap which is 80 Mo (no perl, no man, no doc ....), or one about 250 Mo with perl, doc, man ..... I know that I can make a little kernel because there is no sound, no Ide, no Video, 1 or 2 kind of eth cards, no Scsi ... But, for the Xwindow, it's more, more, more difficult, and at this time I need more informations from my customer to know what exactly needs it,s application for display, if vga is enough, perhaps I can avoid Xwindow. If you have informations about "displaying" without Xwindow, I'll be very glade, if you can give it to me. > > You'd be better off using a remote session viewer, > like VNC. There are several VNC compatible clients > for Linux and they work better if the server is > running X rather than Windoze. Yes I know, I looked to TightVnc, and Yes, it's better with Xwindow server ;-), but if there is between 30 and 50 stations which use the client/server app 24h/24h 7j/7j .... (it's an industrial environment without fault tolerance), I think it can not work very well on the network, this is true or not? > > I'd be interested to hear of your progress. > No problems Tom, I'll thank you for your answer and your help. If you don't see mail from me since a long time, it's because I'm trying to get a result ;-). -- Pascal Brugier --------------------------------------------------------------- Easter-eggs Sp�cialiste GNU/Linux 44-46 rue de l'Ouest - 75014 Paris - France - M�tro Gait� Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37 - Fax: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 76 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.easter-eggs.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 709D77A2 - ED24 4E29 E5B4 FDE7 56A4 352D F24E 7E68 709D 77A2 _______________________________________________________________
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
