On Sat, 2003-07-12 at 12:24, Marc E. Fiuczynski wrote: > Mike... thanks for the pointer to the project description & goals page. > > LEAF is definitely a project in of itself -- being focused on routing, > firewalling, WISPing, etc. In fact, most of the development should focus on > those issues alone and not on the more mundane issues of installation, > package maintenance, and creating releases / branches. It was for this > reason that I was suggesting that LEAF migrate to using a Debian (or > whatever) to take care of these more "mundane" yet complex issues.
Marc, We have talked about this in the past on the leaf-devel list. > For example, what I wanted was something along the lines of the LEAF WISP > distribution working together with PPPOE. While PPPOE works with Bering out > of the box, it does not easily with the WISP distribution. Moreover, WISP > clumps packages together into its own LRP packages, rather than reusing > those from Bering. Thus, without putting together the appropriate packages > for BERING or piecing together the appropriate files for WISP, one cannot > "easily" get this to work. Do they use the same libraries? I know Bering uses glibc 2.0, but I'm not sure if Vladimir hasn't moved on to a newer release. That may explain the difference. I agree greater package coordination would be beneficial to our users and developers. > The bottom line is that from this respect LEAF has not reached its goal of > being "EASY". It certainly is "easier" than doing everything from scratch > (and I applaud everyone who has taken it this far), but it needs to get even > easier for people than where it is now. The new config system that is being developed may address this issue. > What is nice about Debian is package management feature. There are others of > course... and I don't really care which one is used, as long as it makes it > EASY for people to configure a LEAF appliance with LEAF-related packages. Package formats of deb and rpm are to large for our purposes, that's why I mentioned we looked at: udeb, ipkg, etc. Handling dependency checking while maintaining a small footprint is not a trivial task. Search results for 'udeb' http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?method=and&format=short&config=leaf-devel_lists_sourceforge_net&restrict=&exclude=&words=udeb [leaf-devel] iPKG (package management system) http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg05986.html > For example, what I would like is the ability to install a base LEAF system > and then easily customize it be whatever appliance I wish without having to > be concerned with the interdendencies of packages, editing a syslinux.cfg > file, etc. Moreover, I should be able to set up the LEAF box to easily > upgrade packages to the latest, greatest, stable form. But that's just me... This is laudable, but it may not be achievable. Please direct all future comments on this topic to our leaf-devel list. Thanks. -- Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ SF.net Projects: ffl, leaf, phpwebsite, phpwebsite-comm, sitedocs ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more. Download & eval WebKing and get a free book. www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
