Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Thursday 20 November 2003 23:20, you wrote: the entire discussion is quite stimulating. two clarifications: 1) one email suggests 128MB or more RAM for the pentium I or 486 clients. 2) another email suggest 128MB ram for *each* client on the server. (gulp!). Are you sure? You'll be wasting RAM. Instead, you should put it on the server. snip ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
the entire discussion is quite stimulating. two clarifications: 1) one email suggests 128MB or more RAM for the pentium I or 486 clients. 2) another email suggest 128MB ram for *each* client on the server. (gulp!). other conclusions 1) all agree that bandwidth of the LAN surprisingly not an issue. 2) most agree a good video card would suffice. most of these can do 800x600 16bit or whatever. 3) supreet says keep apps and environments/software ecology consistent. what i do find amazing, is that no discussion or exploration on the alternatives and choices available. for instance, all just place their bets on ltsp. if you check the pxe site, perhaps you may find something a little more convenient, but i don't know. am sure other alternatives are worth considering. :-) LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
hi everybody We are using LTSP running a setup of more than 100 thin clients.It works fine. We are using mozilla mail as a mail client.Whenever there is any big attachement (say ~1 MB) system logged out(This happens with only the slower machines like P-75 486). I have tried by increasing VRAM RAM (not good). Does anybody has any idea why it happens? I am also facing display problem with 486 m/c.(usig 8 bit display card older 14 Monitor). Can anybody provide me better settings which i can put in lts.conf ? regards PKU --- LinuxLingam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the entire discussion is quite stimulating. two clarifications: 1) one email suggests 128MB or more RAM for the pentium I or 486 clients. 2) another email suggest 128MB ram for *each* client on the server. (gulp!). other conclusions 1) all agree that bandwidth of the LAN surprisingly not an issue. 2) most agree a good video card would suffice. most of these can do 800x600 16bit or whatever. 3) supreet says keep apps and environments/software ecology consistent. what i do find amazing, is that no discussion or exploration on the alternatives and choices available. for instance, all just place their bets on ltsp. if you check the pxe site, perhaps you may find something a little more convenient, but i don't know. am sure other alternatives are worth considering. :-) LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd __ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 23:20, LinuxLingam wrote: the entire discussion is quite stimulating. two clarifications: 1) one email suggests 128MB or more RAM for the pentium I or 486 clients. 32 - 64 MB RAM is suffcient 2) another email suggest 128MB ram for *each* client on the server. (gulp!). for each machine 32-64 MB RAM other conclusions 1) all agree that bandwidth of the LAN surprisingly not an issue. 10-Mbps Half duplex is a pain. From My experience there is sudden burst of 2MB traffic (mainly nfs activity) at time of start. Then it drops down. But still if you have to support anything above a toy installation, you need 100 Mbps Full-Duplex which is not a big deal anyway. 2) most agree a good video card would suffice. most of these can do 800x600 16bit or whatever. That is correct 3) supreet says keep apps and environments/software ecology consistent. what i do find amazing, is that no discussion or exploration on the alternatives and choices available. for instance, all just place their bets on ltsp. if you check the pxe site, perhaps you may find something a little more convenient, but i don't know. am sure other alternatives are worth considering. I have a copy of pxe. But first rule of thumb is do'nt fix it, if ain't broken. LTSP works fine for me. PXE is a good option if you need multiplatform thin client, as they call universal thin client. It supports RDP, ICA, VNC, X. :-) LL On side note, in a bigger installation, having 4 MB flash-rom would not be a bad idea. That will decrease the network traffic That was my 2 cent tip Supreet ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd -- supreet [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 11:11, supreet wrote: I would love to use thin client terminals made out of pc104 boards. It would come out smaller than size of a cdrom drive. Then again it would be chaeper to buy via c3 nano boards or mini-itx then searching for those mythical pentium 1 and 486's. and these babies would obviously perform better with better i/o devices built-in. Supreet I am no techie on this. Can you elaborate? I know LTSP site linking to some really small boxes (fanless at that) and would love to see I these can be sourced here. Cheaper and smaller is dream mantra!!! -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 23:20, LinuxLingam wrote: the entire discussion is quite stimulating. two clarifications: 1) one email suggests 128MB or more RAM for the pentium I or 486 clients. 2) another email suggest 128MB ram for *each* client on the server. (gulp!). Maybe a wrong sense is conveyed. On client minimum Pi with 32Mb is good. On server RAM should be 128Mb per client - so if you are looking at 10 clients look at 1GB RAM on server. This is safe limit. On one server I am running there is 1.5 GB RAM and we run 15~18 clients without problem. what i do find amazing, is that no discussion or exploration on the alternatives and choices available. for instance, all just place their bets on ltsp. if you check the pxe site, perhaps you may find something a little more convenient, but i don't know. am sure other alternatives are worth considering. If it works good why consider alternative? I found after a bit ( yes not very deep) look around that LTSP was easy to configure and gives working system that is stable and could keep my team of non-techies happy at their workstations. May be some one who has implemented other systems can comment. As to a look see at the system I am in Faridabad / Okhla Give a call on +91-129-5061039 and we can fix up. -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
thanks all for your inputs on the LTSP configurations and minimum specifications. will keep you posted on how it goes. thanks :-) LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 11:41, Sudev Barar wrote: IAC for such server a beefy memory (about 128MB per client is good idea) per client??? !!! I have run one 386 machine also but just for curiosity. If you want to see demo...come over. sure. where is this? when will be convenient? :-) LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
--- Sudev Barar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact I was also under this impression but in actuality it turned out that using IceWM or KDE made only slight difference in memory used but hardly noticeable slowdown. IAC for such server a beefy memory (about 128MB per client is good idea) For thin clients I was considering, I was considering a 386DX with 8MB RAM and 120MB HDD or say 486DX or P75 with 16MB RAM and 250MB HDD ( ancient by today's standards) Old PC's and good graphic cards is sort of contradiction as most the 486 came with ISA bus ( some did with PCI bus ) However since graphics are to be processed at the server and served to client display this means traffic on network. Again was quite surprised to note that in my work situation there is very little network traffic using LTSP as files are served by the same server and only end display travels on network. Yes, astonishingly there is not much requirement of network bandwidth. And, yes, you are right, cards like S3Virge, Trio64, or Cirrus Logic with 1/2 MB VRAM and a basic multisync monitor should suffice. However all said I am still not convinced that 486 with low mem is good idea for running a X (IceWM etc.) desk as the lag time in updating of display tells. The client end is not doing much processing. X is like a client-server in reverse. Your requirement of memory etc. is for the server, which is dependant on the number of users, type of apps to run, desktop environment/window managers etc. I have run one 386 machine also but just for curiosity. If you want to see demo...come over. Definitely possible. -- narsingh Yahoo! India Mobile: Download the latest polyphonic ringtones. Go to http://in.mobile.yahoo.com ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
486 runs but can I call that running with full X interface? Would be interested in getting low down of configurations if some one steps forward. Got more than few of those machines running as of date on Netware /DOS. Regarding 486 running linux. I worked on 486 from 1996-1998 with linux/X-windows. This thing works. Following Config I used to run: Intel 486-dx2 66Mhz 8 Mb Ram Realtek vga card with 256k memory 16 color With little effort this can still be done Supreet -- supreet [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 20:20, supreet wrote: Regarding 486 running linux. I worked on 486 from 1996-1998 with linux/X-windows. This thing works. Following Config I used to run: Intel 486-dx2 66Mhz 8 Mb Ram Realtek vga card with 256k memory 16 color With little effort this can still be done so the question is, if such a 486 pc, or a pentium I, is connected via ltsp to an amd athlonxp with redhat8 or 9, with a graphics card that supports 800x600 24-bit, would it still be able to handle gnome or kde...? and running openoffice? all streaming in from the amd athlonxp server? ?? LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 23:53, LinuxLingam wrote: so the question is, if such a 486 pc, or a pentium I, is connected via ltsp to an amd athlonxp with redhat8 or 9, with a graphics card that supports 800x600 24-bit, would it still be able to handle gnome or kde...? and running openoffice? all streaming in from the amd athlonxp server? All machines that are on my network (rather two networks) run full X with KDE and OpenOffice /Evolution / Mozilla. And in 1024x768 resolution at 16bit resolution as the cards are old ones. Sis cards are a problem but CirrusLogic / S3 cards are fine. My servers are Piv but athlon's have been reported to work equally good. -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
--- LinuxLingam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 20:20, supreet wrote: Regarding 486 running linux. I worked on 486 from 1996-1998 with linux/X-windows. This thing works. Following Config I used to run: Intel 486-dx2 66Mhz 8 Mb Ram Realtek vga card with 256k memory 16 color With little effort this can still be done so the question is, if such a 486 pc, or a pentium I, is connected via ltsp to an amd athlonxp with redhat8 or 9, with a graphics card that supports 800x600 24-bit, would it still be able to handle gnome or kde...? and running openoffice? all streaming in from the amd athlonxp server? When you are thinking of thin client or LTSP kind of network solution, I would not go for Gnome/KDE at the client end. Both are heavy and you don't want to run all the kind of software which come with these two desktop environment, do you? Yes you need a good graphics card capable of 24bit resolution and may be 3D graphics, because you may be intending the clients to access graphics related software. The main idea is to utilise older PCs( 486, P-I) to work efficiently. You serve software like OpenOffice from a central server. My advice is that you stick to a less heavy Window manager like IceWM, Window Maker, or XFCE4(it is much improved). OpenOffice 1.1 is much faster than the earlier versions. In a LTSP environment, the subsequent loading of OpenOffice at the client end, after some user has already done it, will be really fast( one second or thereabout). And yes, such a solution is thoroughly workable. In fact, I was trying to convince my people its efficacy ( I am in Government), but somehow, saving money by utilizing obsolescent hardware has not been a priority in Govt. offices. -- narsingh Yahoo! India Mobile: Download the latest polyphonic ringtones. Go to http://in.mobile.yahoo.com ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 10:48, Narsingh Sahu wrote: When you are thinking of thin client or LTSP kind of network solution, I would not go for Gnome/KDE at the client end. Both are heavy and you don't want to run all the kind of software which come with these two desktop environment, do you? Yes you need a good In fact I was also under this impression but in actuality it turned out that using IceWM or KDE made only slight difference in memory used but hardly noticeable slowdown. IAC for such server a beefy memory (about 128MB per client is good idea) graphics card capable of 24bit resolution and may be 3D graphics, because you may be intending the clients to access graphics related software. The main idea is to utilise older PCs( 486, P-I) to work efficiently. Old PC's and good graphic cards is sort of contradiction as most the 486 came with ISA bus ( some did with PCI bus ) However since graphics are to be processed at the server and served to client display this means traffic on network. Again was quite surprised to note that in my work situation there is very little network traffic using LTSP as files are served by the same server and only end display travels on network. You serve software like OpenOffice from a central server. My advice is that you stick to a less heavy Window manager like IceWM, Window Maker, or XFCE4(it is much improved). OpenOffice 1.1 is much faster than the earlier versions. In a LTSP environment, the subsequent loading of OpenOffice at the client end, after some user has already done it, will be really fast( one second or thereabout). And yes, such a Quite agree on the last about fast opens. However all said I am still not convinced that 486 with low mem is good idea for running a X (IceWM etc.) desk as the lag time in updating of display tells. I have run one 386 machine also but just for curiosity. If you want to see demo...come over. -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 09:11, Sudev Barar wrote: On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 01:36, LinuxLingam wrote: anyone here on the mailing list with thin-clients [snip] Did I mention all are old Pii motherboards from nehru place??? old! hello, hello, i use an 'old' pII for my work as well, loaded with redhat7.3, in 64mb, and it rocks. no need for making that into a thin client. on the list, i know several who will just step forward and talk about their p1, p pros, and even 486sx, running linux. :-) LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 16:12, LinuxLingam wrote: On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 09:11, Sudev Barar wrote: On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 01:36, LinuxLingam wrote: anyone here on the mailing list with thin-clients [snip] Did I mention all are old Pii motherboards from nehru place??? old! hello, hello, i use an 'old' pII for my work as well, loaded with redhat7.3, in 64mb, and it rocks. no need for making that into a thin client. on the list, i know several who will just step forward and talk about their p1, p pros, and even 486sx, running linux. :-) LL 486 runs but can I call that running with full X interface? Would be interested in getting low down of configurations if some one steps forward. Got more than few of those machines running as of date on Netware /DOS. -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] diet-pc, ltsp, netstation, pxes
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 01:36, LinuxLingam wrote: dear all, this is exciting. which thin-client implementation do you recommend, if you have some experience with any of these: 1) ltsp 2) diet-pc 3) netstation 4) pxes 5) [others] on a redhat8 acting as the main server. LTSp been using at two locations for three / four months now each serving about 20 people in office daily without glitches. -- Sudev Barar Learning Linux ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
