Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 04:42:48PM -0500, Greg Smith wrote: Hi All, Thanks for all the feedback on my questions about what it would take to run a slimmed down Fedora 10 on the XO NAND. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-olpc-list/2008-December/msg00022.html To reiterate, the goal is one distribution with two Desktop Environments (Sugar and one standard one). What of the case where all the functionality of Sugar can be replicated using a properly-configured standard desktop environment? (Strawman this sentence may be, but I think we should be open to this option moving forward.) I think the main work now is to pick the minimal package list that we need and will fit on the XO NAND. This is *the* work of making builds. Can anyone get a slimmed down Fedora 10 with window manager running on an XO? Yes. I have a build tool which does so. See: http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=users/erik/rpmxo;a=summary or just: git clone git://dev.laptop.org/users/erik/rpmxo The build tool depends on the current development version of rinse, a rpm bootstrapping utility. For our testing purposes I have included a copy of the rinse mercurial repository in that git tree (http://rinse.repository.steve.org.uk/). Then install rinse by following the instructions in the rinse.repository.steve.org.uk directory in the rpmxo repo created by the above git command. You will need perl, rpm, and wget (note the dependencies listed at http://packages.ubuntu.com/intrepid/rinse). Rinse manages a variety of common issues encountered when build and re-building images, such as caching rpms, bootstrapping yum, and running post-install scripts. It does so in a relatively platform-independent manner. The author and I have been working together to update the system for Fedora 10 and to increase its configurability. (Please note that I have submitted changes to the author's repo which may not yet be reflected in a fresh clone, this is why I have temporarily added the repository to the rpmxo git tree.) To run the build script do: sudo ./initchroot.sh ... in the rpmxo git repository directory yielded by the git clone command above. By default this will make f10.root. Then generate an image to flash onto an unsecured laptop by using: sudo ./mkjffs2.sh fc10.root fc10.img This will create the .crc and .img files which are required for OFW to flash the image onto the laptop. Putting these on a USB key and typing: copy-nand u:\fc10.img ... at the OFW prompt on an XO will flash the system onto the internal NAND. Rebooting should yield a prompt This procedure is still in alpha. Interested parties should test and immediately inform me of any issues encountered. The hard part will come when we need to pick the bare minimum set of functionality. I especially want to know what additional libraries/RPMs/features we need to install beyond what we alrady have in XO 8.2.0. I have been quite frustrated with the Fedora toolset in this regard. Getting a bare minimum of functionality is not something which these tools are typically used to do. The experience of building a Fedora system from 'scratch' contrasts starkly with what we find in Debian, where debootstrapping is a common development pattern which is well-supported by the community. It can be done, and I am going to seek as much help from the Fedora community in doing so as possible. It just isn't easy and I have felt like there are a lot of problems in using Fedora in this fashion which will have to be resolved to make it easy for deployments to use such a build script. (I sincerely hope someone flames me here as any attention to this issue is good attention.) Erik ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
greg wrote: Hi All, Thanks for all the feedback on my questions about what it would take to run a slimmed down Fedora 10 on the XO NAND. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-olpc-list/2008-December/msg00022.html To reiterate, the goal is one distribution with two Desktop Environments (Sugar and one standard one). I think the main work now is to pick the minimal package list that we need and will fit on the XO NAND. Can anyone get a slimmed down Fedora 10 with window manager running on an XO? yes. install any joyride. i'm being flip, of course, but please be precise. our installs _are_ slimmed down fedora releases. and sugar _is_ a window manager. (but seriously: we only need to add to what we have -- we don't need to start from scratch, rebuilding and/or subtracting from fedora.) paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org give one laptop, get one laptop --- http://www.laptop.com/xo ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO
Hi, (but seriously: we only need to add to what we have -- we don't need to start from scratch, rebuilding and/or subtracting from fedora.) In particular, I think: * take a Joyride build * yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop Environment * http://dev.laptop.org/git/users/cscott/sugar-xfce-control should be portable to GNOME in a mechanical (s/xfce/gnome/g) fashion. * follow the rest of the instructions in: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Xfce#Install_Sugar.2FXFCE_Control_Panel to launch GNOME if it's been selected in the control panel * write a GNOME menu item/desktop icon to switch back to Sugar - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
Hi Paul, I mean slimmed down Fedora (probably shouldn't even call it Fedora at that point) plus Gnome, KDE of XFCE window manager. Is that precise enough? If its as easy as yum install gnome on top of 8.2.0 image, that would be great! Thanks, Greg S p...@laptop.org wrote: greg wrote: Hi All, Thanks for all the feedback on my questions about what it would take to run a slimmed down Fedora 10 on the XO NAND. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-olpc-list/2008-December/msg00022.html To reiterate, the goal is one distribution with two Desktop Environments (Sugar and one standard one). I think the main work now is to pick the minimal package list that we need and will fit on the XO NAND. Can anyone get a slimmed down Fedora 10 with window manager running on an XO? yes. install any joyride. i'm being flip, of course, but please be precise. our installs _are_ slimmed down fedora releases. and sugar _is_ a window manager. (but seriously: we only need to add to what we have -- we don't need to start from scratch, rebuilding and/or subtracting from fedora.) paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org give one laptop, get one laptop --- http://www.laptop.com/xo ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:56:47PM -0500, Chris Ball wrote: Hi, (but seriously: we only need to add to what we have -- we don't need to start from scratch, rebuilding and/or subtracting from fedora.) In particular, I think: * take a Joyride build * yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop Environment * http://dev.laptop.org/git/users/cscott/sugar-xfce-control should be portable to GNOME in a mechanical (s/xfce/gnome/g) fashion. * follow the rest of the instructions in: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Xfce#Install_Sugar.2FXFCE_Control_Panel to launch GNOME if it's been selected in the control panel * write a GNOME menu item/desktop icon to switch back to Sugar That seems sufficient to meet the requirement. Erik ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO
On 16.12.2008, at 18:56, Chris Ball wrote: Hi, (but seriously: we only need to add to what we have -- we don't need to start from scratch, rebuilding and/or subtracting from fedora.) In particular, I think: * take a Joyride build * yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop Environment * http://dev.laptop.org/git/users/cscott/sugar-xfce-control should be portable to GNOME in a mechanical (s/xfce/gnome/g) fashion. * follow the rest of the instructions in: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Xfce#Install_Sugar.2FXFCE_Control_Panel to launch GNOME if it's been selected in the control panel * write a GNOME menu item/desktop icon to switch back to Sugar Just curious - why gnome? Isn't xfce supposed to be much lighter on resources? - Bert - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO
Hi, * yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop Environment I gave this a try with latest Joyride (2592), and get a couple of depsolving problems. Maybe one of the RPM ninjas on fedora-olpc-list could take a look at how we could resolve these? Alternatively, maybe we should be hand-picking the list of packages to add, since I see some deps in there we don't want, e.g.: -- Processing Dependency: texlive = 2007-35.fc10 for package: kpathsea -- Processing Dependency: httpd = 2.2.0 for package: gnome-user-share Here's the list of dependency errors: -- Finished Dependency Resolution gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems - Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO
Hi, * yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop Environment I gave this a try with latest Joyride (2592), and get a couple of depsolving problems. Maybe one of the RPM ninjas on fedora-olpc-list could take a look at how we could resolve these? Alternatively, maybe we should be hand-picking the list of packages to add, since I see some deps in there we don't want, e.g.: -- Processing Dependency: texlive = 2007-35.fc10 for package: kpathsea -- Processing Dependency: httpd = 2.2.0 for package: gnome-user-share Here's the list of dependency errors: -- Finished Dependency Resolution gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 from olpc_development has depsolving problems - Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: cyrus-sasl-lib = 2.1.22-15.fc9 is needed by package cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-15.fc9.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-gnome-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) Error: Missing Dependency: gnome-python2 = 2.22.1-3.olpc3 is needed by package gnome-python2-bonobo-2.22.1-3.olpc3.i386 (olpc_development) Do you have an old OLPC-3/8.2 repo hanging around. Those should all be either fc10 (unless they weren't recompiled in the F-10 rawhide) or olpc4 so you shouldn't be seeing any olpc3/fc9 packages. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
Hi Paul, I mean slimmed down Fedora (probably shouldn't even call it Fedora at that point) plus Gnome, KDE of XFCE window manager. Is that precise enough? If its as easy as yum install gnome on top of 8.2.0 image, that would be great! It should be that simple with some caveats. well one word really. dependencies! Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Bobby Powers wrote: On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Erik Garrison e...@laptop.org wrote: I have been quite frustrated with the Fedora toolset in this regard. Getting a bare minimum of functionality is not something which these tools are typically used to do. The experience of building a Fedora system from 'scratch' contrasts starkly with what we find in Debian, where debootstrapping is a common development pattern which is well-supported by the community. It can be done, and I am going to seek as much help from the Fedora community in doing so as possible. It just isn't easy and I have felt like there are a lot of problems in using Fedora in this fashion which will have to be resolved to make it easy for deployments to use such a build script. (I sincerely hope someone flames me here as any attention to this issue is good attention.) sure :) why aren't you building off mstone's work on Puritan? It seems like a lot of duplication of effort; unless I'm missing something, the biggest difference seems to be that yours may be more debian-like. For one, Puritan is a multi-file python framework, which, for a build script which I would like to be as short and clear as possible, may be overkill. Shellscript is plenty concise for this work. I was able to get everything done that I needed without the script getting unweildy. I was additionally able to directly pull in some of the bashisms from the xodist toolset which deal with partitioned image creation, configuration heredocs, etc. (thank you dilinger and xodist devs). Additionally, writing my own simple build system was a great way to work through all the issues involved in setting up a given distribution to run on the XO. I came away from this work with a much better understanding of what issues our software development faces and the specific issues involved in setting up Fedora on the XO (such as nash and initramfsen jffs2 mounting woes). Otherwise, I don't think it really matters, and think that Michael and I should work together going forward. If Puritan does exactly what I have been trying to do and more, then I support working with it and will move that way. That said, if there is interest in having the 'simplest' build system possible, I can continue work on the rpmxo buildscripts. Hope that explains my perspective. Erik ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
The hard part will come when we need to pick the bare minimum set of functionality. I especially want to know what additional libraries/RPMs/features we need to install beyond what we alrady have in XO 8.2.0. I have been quite frustrated with the Fedora toolset in this regard. Getting a bare minimum of functionality is not something which these tools are typically used to do. The experience of building a Fedora system from 'scratch' contrasts starkly with what we find in Debian, where debootstrapping is a common development pattern which is well-supported by the community. It can be done, and I am going to seek as much help from the Fedora community in doing so as possible. It just isn't easy and I have felt like there are a lot of problems in using Fedora in this fashion which will have to be resolved to make it easy for deployments to use such a build script. (I sincerely hope someone flames me here as any attention to this issue is good attention.) Fedora has a set of tools now called Appliance-Tools [1] for creating this sort of thing. You can use it to specify a minimal build and then pull in the extra stuff you want, specify repositories etc. I used it to build a joyride VM I could use for slicing and dicing package deps and the like the other day in around 15 mins (plus the time it takes to construct the actual filesystem etc). I can post the kickstart file somewhere if your interested in using it as a base. The image it produced has a boot issue that I need to get time to fix (or work out why its got root fs issues) but it was a quick demo to see if it helped. I think this is what you are after. There are still some issues with packages pulling in too many deps and as time permits I'm trying to work through most of these issues while not having to fork half the distribution which in turn makes it more work for the OLPC guys. Its a fine line. I can help you as much as possible, I'm relatively free for the next couple of days but will be then travelling over the next couple of weeks so will have limited connectivity. I have no issue with the flames, but would much prefer to help you out than flame back :-D Peter [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ApplianceTools https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ApplianceTools ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:32:58AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: The hard part will come when we need to pick the bare minimum set of functionality. I especially want to know what additional libraries/RPMs/features we need to install beyond what we alrady have in XO 8.2.0. I have been quite frustrated with the Fedora toolset in this regard. Getting a bare minimum of functionality is not something which these tools are typically used to do. The experience of building a Fedora system from 'scratch' contrasts starkly with what we find in Debian, where debootstrapping is a common development pattern which is well-supported by the community. It can be done, and I am going to seek as much help from the Fedora community in doing so as possible. It just isn't easy and I have felt like there are a lot of problems in using Fedora in this fashion which will have to be resolved to make it easy for deployments to use such a build script. (I sincerely hope someone flames me here as any attention to this issue is good attention.) Fedora has a set of tools now called Appliance-Tools [1] for creating this sort of thing. You can use it to specify a minimal build and then pull in the extra stuff you want, specify repositories etc. I used it to build a joyride VM I could use for slicing and dicing package deps and the like the other day in around 15 mins (plus the time it takes to construct the actual filesystem etc). I can post the kickstart file somewhere if your interested in using it as a base. The image it produced has a boot issue that I need to get time to fix (or work out why its got root fs issues) but it was a quick demo to see if it helped. I heard about these (appliance tools) from Reuben. Any documentation you can post would be highly useful. There are a lot of ways to achieve a similar result, and a lot of people appear to have duplicated effort as a result. I think this is good, as it gives us some degree of selection moving forward. Eventually we need to coalesce effort around one system if we are going to update OLPC's build infrastructure successfully. FWIW: The boot issue might be related to nash's mount command not working for jffs2. The quick and dirty way to get around it was to drop busybox into an initramfs and change the root partition mount line in the init script to use busybox's mount command instead of nash's. Found nash extremely unweildy and am curious why it is used in the initramfs. The initrd I produced is: http://dev.laptop.org/~erik/rpmxo/initrd.img-2.6.25-20080925.1.olpc.f10b654367d7065.busybox (It is built against the stock 8.2-767 kernel using stock Fedora initramfs-tools, I just unpacked it and dropped busybox and its library deps in and made the afformentioned hack to init.) I think this is what you are after. There are still some issues with packages pulling in too many deps and as time permits I'm trying to work through most of these issues while not having to fork half the distribution which in turn makes it more work for the OLPC guys. Its a fine line. Yes. This seems to be endemic, but it appears to be generally a problem for systems which don't get stretched in this direction (I have seen the same kind of bloat while testing Ubuntu builds). I can help you as much as possible, I'm relatively free for the next couple of days but will be then travelling over the next couple of weeks so will have limited connectivity. Great! Any way you'd like to help. Paring down dependencies is crucial. 'Minimal' package lists would be also very helpful. I am hacking mine together and I'm worried I might miss critical things that would be obvious to a more experienced Fedora developer. One package-level curiosity I've had is how to auto-remove packages which were automatically installed to satisfy the dependencies of a manually installed package after said packge is removed. I have no issue with the flames, but would much prefer to help you out than flame back :-D And I prefer to cooperate as well! Thanks, Erik ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Slimmed Down Fedora 10 on XO (was Fedora 10 on XO)
Hi All, Thanks for all the feedback on my questions about what it would take to run a slimmed down Fedora 10 on the XO NAND. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-olpc-list/2008-December/msg00022.html To reiterate, the goal is one distribution with two Desktop Environments (Sugar and one standard one). I think the main work now is to pick the minimal package list that we need and will fit on the XO NAND. Can anyone get a slimmed down Fedora 10 with window manager running on an XO? If so, can you record the packages and available space in the specifications section here? http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Feature_roadmap/Run_Fedora_applications_on_XO RTFM answers with URLs also welcome. Chris and Erik, Where are we with getting a proof of concept for this feature in place? You both mentioned some work in this area (Chris on resurrecting something Scott did and Erik on other work). Let me know the status and next steps. The hard part will come when we need to pick the bare minimum set of functionality. I especially want to know what additional libraries/RPMs/features we need to install beyond what we alrady have in XO 8.2.0. Thanks, Greg S ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
