On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 10:54 -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > The distinction between the two really should be not much. Getting > /etc/rwtab* based readonly-root working properly on a distro should make > it work equally well with read-only Flash based boot or PXE network > read-only root boot.
Yep. I see a lot of commonality. In my view, I would love to get more into modifying "livecd-tools" so it's a very flexible system for doing a lot of things, including pseudo-embedded. I mean, even Montavista bases much of their release on RHEL, and Timesys' "reference distro" builds are Fedora. > What do you mean by hybrid? We may run a few things other than X local. That will be an "as implementation is on-going" detail. > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/RHEL5Server > I did extensive work trying to do this. While it is possible to > backport necessary pieces of mkinitrd to RHEL5, it was deemed infeasible > because it would forever be a fork. The changes necessary are too risky > and invasive to ever ship as a RHEL-5.x update. Yes, I've read it, and I'm well aware of your challenges for just the server. "Customer is always right" here. Trying to deal with it. They are slowly opening up to Fedora though (yeah!). We tried to sell them on "Fedora 9/10 now, RHEL 6 for major roll-out." > I have some experience hacking on mkinitrd, and I think it would take me > ~10 hours to backport and fully test. But even then I would be > uncomfortable with it because of the "forever a fork" problem. Understand. We're trying to work out an arrangement with the client on engineering. > As far as init-script changes, it would be rather minimal. I am under > the impression that mainly /etc/rwtab* tweaking can achieve most of what > is needed. That's what I started seeing when I looked at it last week. > I haven't seen this as a problem. How much have you tweaked /etc/rwtab*? I'm playing with it now. I think I can address it. I know part of the issue is what was copied over. I cleared out many files from the reference install that was copied over. I'm sure I'm missing some still. I've started a shell script to wipe out what dirs/files should _not_ be in the s-c-netboot stateless export. > I did run into problems using livecd tools on RHEL5 due to missing > pieces of anaconda. In the end I gave up due to a combination of this > problem and the aforementioned backport issues. Yes, I understand. I'm seeing how much can be maintained as a "fork" for RHEL 5. Not a "fork" of Anaconda itself, but as a supplemental package in a %post or run post-install. > https://fedorahosted.org/k12linux/wiki/RHEL5Server > I built packages for FUSE and all this for RHEL5 here. Oh, crap, looks like I missed your FUSE+LTSPfs, or just forgot about them since I look at this a few months back. Thanx for repointing them out to me. > I suspect the FUSE part would just work if the user were added to the fuse > group or fusermount were setuid root. RHEL5 needs this while Fedora 9 > + does not, due to the new gvf Yep. We're really re-emphasizing the Fedora 9/10 now, RHEL 6 avenue. The problem is with no "public" RHEL 6 schedule, it's hard to plan around it. ;) -- Bryan J Smith - Senior Consultant - Red Hat GPS SE US mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (407) 489-7013 (Mobile) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (non-RH/ext to Blackberry) ----------------------------------------------------- For every dollar you spend on Red Hat solutions, you not only fund the leading community development re- source, but you receive the #1 IT industry leader in corporate value. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ _______________________________________________ Stateless-list mailing list [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/stateless-list
