Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On Thursday 28 February 2002 21:26, David Douthitt wrote: On 2/28/02 at 1:52 AM, guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PicoBSD might as well not even exist anymore. I HAD to reply to this :-) Hehe, I figured this might peek some interest ;-) PicoBSD is now an official part of the FreeBSD distribution, and is included in the source tree. The web pages haven't been updated in a LONG time. There also are very few, if any, floppy disk images to download. The expected thing to do is download the FreeBSD sources. However, there ARE the older PicoBSD images, plus at least two floppy images that I've found based on PicoBSD. One is a cluster director - that is, it handles the initial requests to a cluster and doles out the traffic to the appropriate web server or whatever. So they are still developing PicoBSD, but simply not posting any updates even in the way of information to the project page??? I knew it had been included in FreeBSD, but I haven't loaded a late version. I have used OpenBSD and been happy with it, so maybe I should take a go at a later version of FreeBSD. I just figured they would keep a current changelog or something to that effect on their homepage. :-(. Solaris sucks on an i86, but rules on a Sparc. I heard that 2.6 was alright, but 7 and 8 are slow because they expect SMP. I can verify that 7 and 8 run very slow on i86! At the time it came out, there was very limited NIC drivers too. It is a great version to learn Solaris on in any respect and definately worth the experience, but not for a production machine. On a different note, have anyone come across a open source RIP simulator??? -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On 3/2/02 at 4:30 PM, guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So they are still developing PicoBSD, but simply not posting any updates even in the way of information to the project page??? Apparently so. I knew it had been included in FreeBSD, but I haven't loaded a late version. I have used OpenBSD and been happy with it, so maybe I should take a go at a later version of FreeBSD. I just figured they would keep a current changelog or something to that effect on their homepage. :-(. I've used (somewhat) OpenBSD/mac68k - but since I've only got one keybd and one monitor I run MacOS System 8.1 most of the time... I wonder if the Quadras will work headless? I can verify that [Solaris] 7 and 8 run very slow on i86! At the time it came out, there was very limited NIC drivers too. It is a great version to learn Solaris on in any respect and definately worth the experience, but not for a production machine. I just received Solaris 8 for Intel a few days ago - the requirements are a little more strenuous than Linux (always are, I guess) and were more so than 2.6. 1G of disk?? ...hmmm ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
Lynn, I am not sure what you mean by RIP simulator but there is some great work being done with the GNU/Zebra dynamic routing protocol suite. You can reach them at... www.zebra.org ... also, David has already built a package from the zebra 0.92a release. Regards, -Eric -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of guitarlynn Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 5:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org On Thursday 28 February 2002 21:26, David Douthitt wrote: On 2/28/02 at 1:52 AM, guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PicoBSD might as well not even exist anymore. I HAD to reply to this :-) Hehe, I figured this might peek some interest ;-) PicoBSD is now an official part of the FreeBSD distribution, and is included in the source tree. The web pages haven't been updated in a LONG time. There also are very few, if any, floppy disk images to download. The expected thing to do is download the FreeBSD sources. However, there ARE the older PicoBSD images, plus at least two floppy images that I've found based on PicoBSD. One is a cluster director - that is, it handles the initial requests to a cluster and doles out the traffic to the appropriate web server or whatever. So they are still developing PicoBSD, but simply not posting any updates even in the way of information to the project page??? I knew it had been included in FreeBSD, but I haven't loaded a late version. I have used OpenBSD and been happy with it, so maybe I should take a go at a later version of FreeBSD. I just figured they would keep a current changelog or something to that effect on their homepage. :-(. Solaris sucks on an i86, but rules on a Sparc. I heard that 2.6 was alright, but 7 and 8 are slow because they expect SMP. I can verify that 7 and 8 run very slow on i86! At the time it came out, there was very limited NIC drivers too. It is a great version to learn Solaris on in any respect and definately worth the experience, but not for a production machine. On a different note, have anyone come across a open source RIP simulator??? -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
At 2002-02-28 10:51 -0600, guitarlynn wrote: All of your concerns are well-founded and I approve of this line of consideration. However, when considering the wide availability of download mirrors and the format restrictions binding each of them, a different line of consideration will likely be required to mirror downloads. None of these download mirrors support full site/project mirroring that I am aware of. I'll try to evaluate the available sites next week. If someone else would like to do this, feel free. A few Open Source hosting sites are listed here: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Hosting/ http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/Linux/Projects/Hosting/ I don't speak for anyone but myself, but what I was interpreting from David D's original idea was simply a possible way to mirror our download section. This would have no impact on the LEAF site itself or the way that it is run or formatted. Maybe I confused the Site Update (2002-02-27) thread and this one. I think David is proposing something much different than you do. I think he is proposing a replacement for the /pub and /devel structure for our files. David, Would you please clarify your suggestion? Do you think that seperating out the releases under different names in a download mirror would seperate the release from the project? I doubt it personally. Unknown, and this is what I'm concerned with. I continually try to present our project as a cohesive whole. Separating things in this manner may lead to fragmentation. Would seperating the releases from the site seperate them from the project? ... yes, I think this would. I believe this would be equivalent to a lead developer deciding he/she no longer wished to participate in LEAF at the release/branch level. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/content.php?menu=1000page_id=4 ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
At 2002-02-28 01:52 -0600, guitarlynn wrote: No new format to this site, rather each release taking the effort to update the proposed alternate _download_ mirrors such as Ibiblio, tucows, freshmeat, Dave Central, etc. Not a proposed split, but rather a defined release of the individual releases/branches that reside, are supported, and developed within the umbrella supersite that is LEAF. snip What I'm saying is, you can't download and use LEAF. You can download and use something (and many things) that were made possible directly from LEAF. LEAF is a conglomeration of seperate ideas, processes, and directions with a common ground and brotherhood and /or community. LEAF is a win-win project for the developers, by the developers. Lynn, Your description above closely resembles what SF calls a Foundry. I believe we are more than that. In your opinion, are we a Linux Embedded Appliance Foundry, or are we a project that uses evolution as a development model? In my opinion, we are the latter. About SourceForge.net Foundries http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6029group_id=1 I develop for LEAF, and LEAF only. This is because I like the individual and sum of all the parts better than anything else available. The community is great too. Agreed, wholeheartedly. :-) Proposing a split? Rather, an idea to increase traffic and potential users back to the place we all call home. My resistance to the idea directly relates to the amount of time and effort that went into gathering everyone under one roof. I'm leery of anything that might lead us back to the fragmentation of the past. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/content.php?menu=1000page_id=4 ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On 2/28/02 at 1:52 AM, guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PicoBSD might as well not even exist anymore. I HAD to reply to this :-) PicoBSD is now an official part of the FreeBSD distribution, and is included in the source tree. The web pages haven't been updated in a LONG time. There also are very few, if any, floppy disk images to download. The expected thing to do is download the FreeBSD sources. However, there ARE the older PicoBSD images, plus at least two floppy images that I've found based on PicoBSD. One is a cluster director - that is, it handles the initial requests to a cluster and doles out the traffic to the appropriate web server or whatever. Solaris sucks on an i86, but rules on a Sparc. I heard that 2.6 was alright, but 7 and 8 are slow because they expect SMP. ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
At 2002-02-27 10:45 -0800, Mike Sensney wrote: At 06:41 AM 2/27/2002 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote: BTW, our released files are already on Ibiblio.org as part of the SF mirrors. A link to the SF mirror is on the ibiblio.org home page in the first right box labeled Sourceforge ftp mirror. ftp://ftp3.sourceforge.net/ ftp://ftp3.sourceforge.net/pub/sourceforge/leaf/ The SF ftp structure sucks and the Ibiblio mirror of the SF site sucks for the same reason. Mike, I don't like the current SF file release system any better than you do. Even the SF staff dislikes it. That's one of the reasons I believe there will be a rewrite. Ibiblio offers a tree structure now. Why wait for SF to implement a tree structure for us when obviously this isn't a priority issue for SF and probably won't be offered for some time if ever? The main reason is a central location for users to locate our files. Storage of large files including CD images don't seem to be an issue. snip I suggest that Ibiblio is a much better repository for our files than SF. It may be, but will everyone agree to the naming conventions they enforce? http://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/howtosubmit.html Also, how many developers are allowed to submit changes to the repository? I was unable to locate this information. The last consideration is licensing. David is using the MIT license, and everyone else is using GPL. From what I understand reading the iBiblio licensing page, only one license is allowed per repository. http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/LICENSES/!INDEX.html -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/content.php?menu=1000page_id=4 ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
At 2002-02-27 16:28 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote: At 2002-02-27 10:45 -0800, Mike Sensney wrote: Storage of large files including CD images don't seem to be an issue. snip I suggest that Ibiblio is a much better repository for our files than SF. It may be, but will everyone agree to the naming conventions they enforce? http://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/howtosubmit.html Also, how many developers are allowed to submit changes to the repository? I was unable to locate this information. The last consideration is licensing. David is using the MIT license, and everyone else is using GPL. From what I understand reading the iBiblio licensing page, only one license is allowed per repository. http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/LICENSES/!INDEX.html Mike, There is another problem. I just finished looking through the LSM-TEMPLATE. It is mandatory to specify a Primary-site. iBiblio only provides a mirror/repository. Where would the primary site be located? http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/LSM-TEMPLATE Primary-site: This should be the final location, not an incoming directory. First line lists site and base directory Next is the sizes and names of all files. The size can be left off. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/content.php?menu=1000page_id=4 ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On 2/27/02 at 4:28 PM, Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The last consideration is licensing. David is using the MIT license, and everyone else is using GPL. From what I understand reading the iBiblio licensing page, only one license is allowed per repository. Sounds like I'm the odd man out, eh? :-) I'd like to see each distro get a files area on ibiblio - that would solve the above problem as well. Each distribution needs some recognition; LEAF isn't one distro, it's a conglomeration. LEAF itself (apart from any distributions) doesn't really have any files - unless you count packages, maybe. Of course, each package may have different licensing as well - djb's tools all have that funky license, but others have different licenses. I'm sure I must have packaged some with a MIT/BSD license somewhere I'd like to see each distro get: * Freshmeat entry * ibiblio directory * Linux.com entry in distribution listing... * Any other archives/collections... Whatever came of trying to use GNU Savannah? ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On Wednesday 27 February 2002 23:07, David Douthitt wrote: On 2/27/02 at 4:28 PM, Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The last consideration is licensing. David is using the MIT license, and everyone else is using GPL. From what I understand reading the iBiblio licensing page, only one license is allowed per repository. Sounds like I'm the odd man out, eh? :-) Naw, M$ will be using Oxygen ported to Win32 in the new WinRTR release though :O ...j/k I'd like to see each distro get a files area on ibiblio - that would solve the above problem as well. Each distribution needs some recognition; LEAF isn't one distro, it's a conglomeration. That is a good thought, and probably one reason many of the other similar projects are getting a lot of recognition w/o being nearly as versitile. I've seen some first time project browsers get rather confused with the conglomerate site, but I don't think breaking up LEAF would help any of us other than downloading and some documentation that is release specific. As you suggested, David, I think that might be to an advantage to everyone. When someone goes to a site that lists different single floppy embedded linux distro's, what is going to multiply the traffic to the LEAF site itself? possibly 4 out of 10 links back to LEAF! I'd like to think that many of the developers here truly deserve some recognition for the wonderful work they have done. btw, how's Solaris x86 working for ya??? It was a real dog here, but cheaper than a Sparc to learn on! -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
David Douthitt, 2002-02-27 23:07 -0600 On 2/27/02 at 4:28 PM, Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The last consideration is licensing. David is using the MIT license, and everyone else is using GPL. From what I understand reading the iBiblio licensing page, only one license is allowed per repository. Sounds like I'm the odd man out, eh? :-) David, Not at all. You made a choice, that's all. I think I remember reading somewhere, that those who write the code get to chose the licence. :-) I'd like to see each distro get a files area on ibiblio - that would solve the above problem as well. Each distribution needs some recognition; LEAF isn't one distro, it's a conglomeration. LEAF itself (apart from any distributions) doesn't really have any files - unless you count packages, maybe. Of course, each package may have different licensing as well - djb's tools all have that funky license, but others have different licenses. I'm sure I must have packaged some with a MIT/BSD license somewhere This is where we disagree. I believe this is a single project with many releases/branches. ref. http://www.mail-archive.com/leaf-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04417.html I'd like to see each distro get: * Freshmeat entry * ibiblio directory * Linux.com entry in distribution listing... * Any other archives/collections... This sounds like a proposed split. It's exactly the opposite of what I've been trying to do. What happens when a release/branch is made obsolete by a new one (e.g. Eigerstein - Dachstein)? Do we create a bunch of new directories and records for each new release/branch? I belive this would lead to fragmentation. Whatever came of trying to use GNU Savannah? I was evaluating it a while ago. The last I read they were abandoning the SF code in favor of phpGroupWare. http://savannah.gnu.org/docs/savannah-plan.html I have an account there. Does anyone else? -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/content.php?menu=1000page_id=4 ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org
On Thursday 28 February 2002 00:45, Mike Noyes wrote: This is where we disagree. I believe this is a single project with many releases/branches. ref. This I agree with, w/o necessarily heading in the same exact direction. D Douthitt wrote: I'd like to see each distro get: * Freshmeat entry * ibiblio directory * Linux.com entry in distribution listing... * Any other archives/collections... This sounds like a proposed split. It's exactly the opposite of what I've been trying to do. What happens when a release/branch is made obsolete by a new one (e.g. Eigerstein - Dachstein)? Do we create a bunch of new directories and records for each new release/branch? I belive this would lead to fragmentation. No new format to this site, rather each release taking the effort to update the proposed alternate _download_ mirrors such as Ibiblio, tucows, freshmeat, Dave Central, etc. Not a proposed split, but rather a defined release of the individual releases/branches that reside, are supported, and developed within the umbrella supersite that is LEAF. A split would occur when someone chooses to remove the support, development, sharing of ideas and methods, and ultimately the disk space of the individual part _from_ LEAF. I've seen David respond to a Dachstein question, I've seen Charles respond to a Oxygen question, and I know for a fact that almost everyone including myself has taken a stab at a LRP 2.9.4 or earlier question at some point in time. I don't think anyone has ever told someone that they couldn't use their package in someone else's branch if they wanted to. But I have seen someone create a killer branch to prove a theory. What I'm saying is, you can't download and use LEAF. You can download and use something (and many things) that were made possible directly from LEAF. LEAF is a conglomeration of seperate ideas, processes, and directions with a common ground and brotherhood and /or community. LEAF is a win-win project for the developers, by the developers. When I go to Walmart, I don't come home and say that I bought a Walmart; rather I say I bought something _at_Walmart_. The many things I buy at Walmart causes me to come back more often and explore what else I could get at Walmart and that I do. When someone finds _something_at_LEAF, they will know that it is not LEAF in the full meaning of the project, but rather one useful piece that makes up LEAF . They will also know that there is most likely more good things to try at LEAF. It amounts to name marketing through the sum of the individual, different pieces that the name contains. For the public growth of the project as a whole. I personally develop for LEAF, not just Dachstein, or Bering, or Oxygen, or branchX. I watch some other embedded distro's grow as well. Matthew Grant is doing a new WAN router thing according to his 'plains' website. You still can't write protect a FreeSCO disk and boot your machine. Coyote is pretty much a small harddisk distro now. BBImage has a real nice floppy disk generator using a 2.4.x kernel via CGI. PicoBSD might as well not even exist anymore. Solaris sucks on an i86, but rules on a Sparc. I develop for LEAF, and LEAF only. This is because I like the individual and sum of all the parts better than anything else available. The community is great too. Proposing a split? Rather, an idea to increase traffic and potential users back to the place we all call home. /soapbox and apologies to those of you who paid to download this -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] q regarding an ftp site for leaf-project.org (was different)
At 12:06 PM 2/26/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no objection to this, but we would need several things to happen. Files stored there would have to be updated through some mechanism when there is one in place already on sourceforge. Maybe the primary file storage site should not be at SF. Same for the web pages. Kind of like what Charles has set up for his web pages. See http://lrp.steinkuehler.net/mirrors.htm. Then mirror (rsync?) the files to secondary locations (SF, Ibiblio, etc.). But the big one is will they set up the vhost for ftp.leaf-project.org? Currently I can't direct to a sub directory through DNS. Unless we want to state in the download instructions page you start here \and\drill\down\to\linux\leaf? IIRC Ibiblio will vhost ???.org type web sites. But not ???.com as that is commercial. Don't know if they will vhost an ftp site. But as to the second point, the easiest way would be to list ftp.leaf-project.org/path/to/leaf in the download instructions.
