Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic]

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Benoit PAPILLAULT <benoit.papillault AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO generation [back on-topic]
  • Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:32:32 +0100

Karsten Behrmann a écrit :
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:56:10 +0100
Laurent Wandrebeck <low AT low.ath.cx> wrote:

Stop it right now. You seem to forget that sorcery is necessary to install
a system with an iso. Several people asked for an iso that supports
something else that pure x86. If sorcery aim is to be pure x86,
that simply _sucks_.

So? write it then.

We mostly did.

I am working for source mage pretty much all of my free time. Still, I
cannot do everything.
All I say to this discussion is,
I will not write nor maintain bi-arch support for/on the ISO while there
are still users coming into #sourcemage being really confused by the
installer. A seasoned SMGL pro has no problem with the ISO,
that is sure, but nearly everyone else seems to.
(ISO team, please don't be offended, it's just a fact that I work to
correct)
I cannot work on three things at once.

Sure, so on what are you working? I only see the name of David in our
RoadMap [1].


Of course, this does not have to keep you from doing bi-arch all on
your own. We are an open-source project, any modifications you want to
do you can. But be prepared it will be a hell of a lot of work.
I can only slightly ironically say "Have a lot of fun!"

We can. But if it's not integrated back, we are pointed out as not
working with the main team, "stunkorks" work?. I think we could work on
proj2's sorcery like sandalle started then.

You can do what you want. You can vote to make the devs to what you
want. But you cannot by yourself make half of the SMGL team dance to
your tune.

On my side, here are the areas I plan to work on:

- bi-arch port (x86_64 and maybe sparc64 if something can give me an
access to a sparc64 machine). Since sorcery needs some modification, I
could continue the work started on the proj2 branch for instance. As far
as the grimoire is concerned, glibc at least requires some modification,
where those could be done? I'd like to know who is interested in such
architectures as well and which one! If someone wants x86_64, tell us
right now!!!

- since no decision have been taken on the scripts set that will be used
for the next ISO, I'm volonteering to maintain the script we are
currently using to build the ISO. I could do so in a separate branch
(proj3). To ease the job of running those scripts and uploading the
resulting ISO, David Kowis has volonteer to host the script. Is it still
OK David?

- at the same time, I will investigate on using INSTALL_ROOT to produce
ISO since it's a good way to reuse what the sorcery team is doing and
avoid to reinvent the wheel. I've already started and it seems promising.

- I'll be happy if we decide to use BearPerson's scripts. They have been
written from scratch with a new modular design. I should point out
however that both scripts cannot be merged together in a near future, so
deciding which scripts we will be using is a key decision. I'm
requesting here a clear statement from Unet or sandalle on this topic,
to avoid wasting my time on maintaining the current set of scripts.
Deadline: 2005-02-01.

- As far as the install script is concerned, David has volonteer to work
on it with a modular design. I'm quite happy to have a new member in the
team to take care of that. I've mainly tried to maintain the script left
by hgg, but failed totally on the RAID & LVM part. (evms has been
included on 0.9.4-test3 ISO ... ). I even think that it could be a
separate spell installed on the ISO as any other spell and that could be
used to install chroot as well as real system. Comments?

- As far as the 1.0 release is concerned, i think it would be good to
have some quality criteria. However, if the criteria is to not have
people complaining here and there about stuff not working, we will never
have such 1.0 release. Usually, happy people are not showing up but
newbies are just posting bugs without taking the time needed to fix them
or help fix them. Moreover, I cannot fix a bug than I'm unable to
reproduce myself without some help (I requested some help on bug #7642
[2], but even the developper that were able to reproduce the problem did
not give any information). So far, my criteria was to run twice "sorcery
rebuild" on the installed system to ensure that people will not have
problem casting spells.

Comments, decision, volonteerS ... are welcome :-)
Benoit PAPILLAULT, ISO guru

[1] http://wiki.sourcemage.org/index.php?page=ISO+RoadMap
[2] http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7642






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page