On Saturday 13 July 2002 00:55, George Georgalis wrote: > Is Bering GNU?
Are you using any DBJ utilities or any other binaries that are not GPL'ed? I don't believe you downloaded "Bering/GNU" as the particular license used with LEAF is up to the individual developer. I would suggest stopping any systems you have now and remove any software that is not GPL'ed and part of the GNU project if this is a mandate of yours. I guess if we were strictly GNU, the project would be hosted on Savanah, not SourceForge. > I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? > Where are the other compile time options for other binaries? Just > how was Bering_1.0-rc3_img_bering_1680.bin made? Do you have room on your floppy for the complete kernel source? It is available on the LEAF site if you would like the SRC, I seriously doubt that you need to compile a new kernel or package to get something to function correctly. In any regards, there is no compilers included with the LEAF distributions for lack of space limitations. Our distributions are router-type products, not development platforms. Almost all code written by LEAF is Ash shell script, I imagine you can figure out where the SRC for this is. > After spending a good part of a week, and _all_ day Friday getting up > a Bering router before a deadline -- subsequently missing the first > day of a conference http://h2k2.org -- I looked back at what was the > problem. I discovered I was hacking around a product (the Bering > image) much like the manner of before I used Linux. I have this disk > image, that I mount to find, compressed archives, containing finely > tailored scripts and a handful of binaries. Together they make up the > GNU Bering. (And maybe other leaf versions as well.) I apologize for you missing your deadline and/or conference. This happens quite frequently to Admins of any OS that do not plan an install/turn-over properly, I hardly feel that we are responsible for your own lack of Administration/deadline skills. The core OS that boots up is Bering and includes Syslinux, Busybox, and almost everything else is Ash shell-script. Packages like pump, dhcpd, dnscache, etc.... are add-on packages that are not Bering or LEAF. Some of these add-on packages are included with the image, many of them are not. What you put on you system and use is utimately up to you to decide. Is Linux GNU? Not ideally, maybe you should only use GNU/HURD. I think that Oxygen is the LEAF release that works more inline to what you are expecting, but Oxygen is MIT licenced and I could not image the fit using this license would cause you. In any regards, why were you hacking the product to get it running at deadline in a production environment? Simple configuration suffices for thousands of users of this product w/o needing to hack any source code. Possibly one of us is missing the obvious answer. > I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and > http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, or even a file that says > version xx.yy.zz of busybox was compiled with the following patch and > compile time options. Or maybe a tgz of the /usr/local/src/bering > where the image was made? Nothing. I find myself writing scripts to > extract and compress lrp files. Surely everyone doesn't gzip -c9 what > they made by tar cf after mounting and extracting their first floppy > image? Is this the intended way to indoctrinate new developers to > the old school? No, most of us use the included "lrpkg" utility with the "lrcfg" utility that has been around for over five years now. This would be the same one you have used for years with Eigerstein. Developers should have been rather familiar with the Developers Guide that is clearly placed in our extensive and complete FAQ section of the LEAF web-site. I have serious doubts that you really needed to do anything besides add/remove add-on packages and configure them like everyone else seems to have little problem doing. > I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or > how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting > the distro. Nobody knew because the design is not conducive to group > development, it's intended use is like that of proprietary software > -- take the binary, configure it with the configuration menu and be > like everyone else. Ummm.... ok! ;-) Can you point me to a statement on the LEAF site that declares that we are release developement tools/distribution? How many DOS files do you have with a "*.tar.gz" name? I assume your just upset and bantering at this point, how many of the well-read LUG groups are using LEAF? You might have found a better answer to your questions if you had asked someone who was some-what familiar with the project. Let's make this clear again: !!! LEAF IS NOT A DEVELOPMENT PLATFORM !!!! Surely with your experience and skills, you have access to a GNU development box that includes "tar" and "rename" utilites! I suggest GNU/HURD to avoid any ugly non-GNU code that might happen to be included in one of the nasty Linux distributions available! > Okay, I just found the developer.rtf and scanned the whole thing. > Formidable task, but I only see part of the forest and none of the > trees. I already know linux and there seem to be some very specific > LRP details in there, but will it be done before it's out of date? > I'm not saying produce a `./configure && make && make image` but if > the environment for building the release was published, or easier to > find, I'm sure there would be a lot more community support. At one > point I kicked myself for not looking in CVS before, but when I got > in there, was in disbelief -- no source, only doc. Ummm.... you haven't downloaded David D's development CD then? This would seem pretty obvious if you had actually read the Development FAQ or examined the authors' website that is linked from the download area. Are you saying that you install a Linux system, install all the source-code, hack all of it to your personal preference, compile it, install all of your customized changes, then complain to the Distro mailing lists and well-read LUGS that the end-result is not working like you intended AND that it is their fault that it is not working as you intended it? Sounds pretty moronic to me. > So now I have problems with my image to resolve, why do those Belkin > cards detect as reltek under RH but, none of the Bering modules will > work with them??? Ummm... RH is not GNU and I wouldn't touch it. What changes have they made to the modules and auto-detection from stock GNU utilities? Are the RH modules possibly closed-source manufacturer drivers? Shoot, maybe you can reduce RH down to a single-floppy OS with complete development tools and compilers, include propietary modules, and get it all to work for everyone as they expect w/o any knowledge of the changes you made to get the floppy to work (you also need to account for any custom binaries changes that they may make to the system). > How will I ever get my tulips back from my boss so > I can test an image at home? Call him at home or run down to Best Buy and spend $10 on a Linksys LNE110TX card. This doesn't sound like a LEAF problem here. > What am I going to do about making an > image and quickly changing a few parameters (ssh host keys, network, > firewall and other site information) or major structure (LaBera, ppp, > ipsec, dns) without spending a ton of time hand extracting and > compressing components? Use the included "lrcfg" utility like everyone else or write a better one or simply copy the necessary files to a GNU desktop (doesn't need to have compilers or anything like that) and create a package SRC tree and make you changes there (the GNU tar utility works great with the ".lrp" extension, I use it). > I'm going to make my own distribution. > reBering. Complete with scripts to mount and extract all the > subcomponents, global configure, mix'n'match packages, compress and > unmount. Great! Don't learn how to use something existing, just get mad and make you own. I be sure to flame you when I bork a custom binary and it doesn't work, or I can't find SRC for shell-scripts, or your documentation doesn't meet my expetations when I haven't even read it. Sounds like the best solution to me. > Only I don't think I can call it GNU because since I'm in a > hurry, I won't have time to reverse engineer the compile time options > and source. I'd rather work on putting it on an eprom anyway. Not GNU, you must be incrediably retarded to think that I will ever let you develop something non-GNU after getting this far through this thread. Good God, you must be the core-of-all-evil for even thinking such a idea. You better have a complete SRC tree on there too with excellent (and compete) documentation. I think you know where all the source is, being that it has all been linked in this thread. Someone has already gotten LEAF to work off of an EPROM, but you would probably need to find the documentation and read it. > In all sincerity, Bering is very cool. It could just be a lot better > if it was more in the spirit of _encouraging_ open source development > rather than barley qualifying, actually I bet if it was audited, it > wouldn't pass. If there are scripts to tar and gzip a lrp package, > why aren't they part of a tools.tgz right beside package_src.tgz and > compile_configs.tgz next to the Leaf_UML packages and extraction > instructions for odd archives? I know asking for doc is a lot, but > maintaining a file of command lines used to make the binaries from > source would be an excellent first step. I will also expect this in the /usr/local/src and /doc directory of your image. It should meet my expectations without any reading being necessary. You might what to start from the Bering documentation, it is the most complete documentation of any OS/distribution that I have been exposed to. -- ~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! ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ------------------------------------------------------------------------ leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
