RE: [Thinstation-developer] Lprng package

[Miles R. <mr...@we...>]

I think we may need to be better coordinate with the various contributed
packages, once a new TS release is made, the contributors of the packages,
should test there package and make sure it still works.  I think this should
really be done before TS-O-MATIC is updated with the new contrib.  Thoughts?

-----Original Message-----
From: Trevor Batley [mailto:tr...@ba...] 
Sent: Sunday, 29 August 2004 01:01 p.m.
To: Mike Eriksen
Cc: Matthew E. Bernold; 'Pascal van der Weiden'; Miles Roper;
Ome...@in...; Thinstation LIST
Subject: Re: [Thinstation-developer] Lprng package

On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 22:45, Mike Eriksen wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Trevor B wrote:
> 
> > firefox does NOT need to be a pkg, it can be a package, but that is 
> > almost all you can load. It is most definitely easier to use it as a
pkg.
> 
> I would have prefered if Trevor had capitalized "need" and not "not". It 
> is technically possibly to have firefox as a package, but you have to be
> lucky with the X driver as most of them are too fat to allow this 
> solution.

:P

>  
> > I think all the common packages should be listed in the distribution 
> > build.conf (with firefox & flash as pkg - due to size issues...) also 
> > ensuring a pkg example.
> 
> Agreed as long as with talk about the TS-O-Matic distribution. At present,

> there are so few packages that listing all of them isn't any problem. 
> But if we suddenly get zillions of contributions, we'll face a problem.
> 
> With the vanilla TS distribution, I think we'll have a problem listing the

> packages as they may appear on the fly - e.g after a stable release.
> 
> > We do not want to have a thinstation package for downloading & another 
> > for TS-O-Matic. TS-O-Matic was designed to use the standard thinstation 
> > install, so that there is only one baseline with no alterations required

> > (apart from downloading the 'optional' packages).
> > 
> > Trevor B
> 
> Basically I agree here too. But as the TS-O-Matic site needs to download 
> the add-ons, it needs to adapt build.conf accordingly. Besides this, 
> TS-O-Matic really should be as a vanilla downloaded TS.
> 
Need to look at an easier way to 'adapt' the build.conf. Maybe just
append the build.conf.<package> file to build.conf.

Also need to show what is available at each TS-O-Matic mirror (possibly
just list the build.conf.<package> files? Thoughts?

> > I think you will find that the 2.0.2 TS-O-matic has nearly all the 
> > 'options' available (but not necessarily in the build.conf - for the 
> > above reason). Not sure about the rdesktop_cvs though.
> 
> The rdesktop_cvs is there too. I have just moved it to the section with 
> the other contribs, as I'd misplaced it originally.
> 
> Mike
> 
Trevor B

==================================================
Attention:
The information contained in this message and/or attachments is intended
only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon,
this information by person or entities other than the intended recipient
is prohibited.  If you receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your system and destroy any copies.
===================================================