[Pkg-ltsp-devel] 0.82debian2 - what's coming?

[Vagrant Cascadian]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:54:08PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Vagrant Cascadian]
> > i want to avoid any dependencies that aren't absolutely necessary.
> > i'd actually like to move towards a "ltsp-client-core" package, to
> > provide the absolute basic diskless client functionality, and other
> > things like X and sound and such are either packages or
> > commandline/configuration options to ltsp-build-client. the default
> > could very well be to install everything, but there should be a way
> > to get a more basic diskless client.
> 
> I believe we are already there, as all the non-essential pacages are
> listed as packages to install using the EARLY_PACKAGES variable, and
> thus can be easily overrides when needed.
> 
> ltsp-client only depend on lsb-base, nbd-client, ldm | sdm-terminal |
> x-display-manager, initramfs-tools | initrd-netboot-tools, and the
> rest can be configured using the --early-packages flag.
 
it's the "ldm | sdm-terminal | x-display-manager" dependency i'd like to
avoid making an absolute dependency, and also the ltsp-server dependency
on esound-clients.

not all diskless terminals need be X terminals, and not all NFS servers
need be sound servers or application servers.

i think it's possible to make the code easily make the defaults install
everything, but still have the option of a more basic install, without
having overly complex code.

> We need to avoid making ltsp too compex.  those that want complexity
> can use lessdisks. :)

well, my goal for working on ltsp is to drop the need for lessdisks,
which we've mostly achieved (and in many ways, improved upon) so far.

i don't want to spend lots of time coding something that people will
refuse to merge- part of that is writing good code, but part of it is
fundamental differences in design goals. the first, i can work on, but
the latter requires some discussion.

live well,
  vagrant