From: Chris S. <ch...@in...> - 2007-06-26 13:05:55
|
Hi Walter, I'm forwarding these two messages on to the folks who do the development of LinuxCOE. Thanks for the feedback! Chris walter harms wrote: > hi chris, > i run into a problem since my linuxcoerc was broken. ntl the cgi should > cry or drop a a decent default if it can not find that file. (no it creates > an empty select box). > While looking for bugs i found: > File does not exist: /srv/www/htdocs/overlib.js, referer: http://corleone/systemdesigner-cgi-bin/coe_bootimage > you do not provide them. > > > so i installed the docs. the docs need to be installed into the same > dir as everything else. the configure create a systemdesigner-doc > > something like: > prefix = /usr/local/systemdesigner/4 > is more reasonable. > > > i tried to fix the linuxcoerc but was unable to get a distro requester, no idea why. > > re, > wh > > > > hi chris, i was just trying your latest version, here my first impressions: 1. It was unclear what to download systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? sugestion: call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse btw for you own good call the snapshot systemdesigner-2007-06-22, something like that. It is nice to know to what version the bug reports relates :) Do not forget to write: "get systemdesigner and at least 1 addon" 2. Intalldir in systemdesigner/Makefile prefix = /usr/local/systemdesigner/4 in systemdesigner-opensuse-4 prefix = /opt/systemdesigner-opensuse/4 Is it intentional to have someparts in /opt some in /usr/local ? i personaly prefer the same dir is the /4 intentional ? i had the impression that it is short for "for" ? 3. post-actions The post-actions script stalled because i broke some variables (accidently), it can be improved by [ -f $CONFIG_SITE ] && . $CONFIG_SITE making sure that variables are realy set. (it would be nice to have a full path in CONFIG_SITE) 4. config.site here is my config.site it should basicly work with all newer suse releases. ## # Site Customization file config.site # these variables can be set via the command line as # ./configure httpdcfgdir=/SomeValue ... # or all at once by editing this configuration file and then # export CONFIG_SITE=./config.site && ./configure ## # APACHE Web Services # From httpd.conf (or equiv) # replace value of httpdcfgdir to match web server location # for directory of included module-specific configuration files if test "x${httpdcfgdir}" = x; then httpdcfgdir=/etc/apache2/sysconfig.d fi # From httpd.conf (or equiv) # replace value of docrootdir to match web server location # eg. DocumentRoot /var/www -> docrootdir=/var/www # so, the directory seen when you point a web browser at # http://YourSite/ and will be populated to become http://YourSite/@PACKAGE_NAME@ if test "x${docrootdir}" = x; then docrootdir=/srv/www fi # For your particular web service # replace value of httpd_user with the UID or user name running the process if test "x${httpd_user}" = x; then httpd_user=wwwrun fi # For your particular web service # replace value of httpd_group with the GID or group name running the process if test "x${httpd_group}" = x; then httpd_group=www fi # SUDO Services # For your particular sudo implementationftp service # replace value of sudo config file sudoers_cfg with your reference location # so the httpd_user can perform mount/manipulate/umount operations on # the generated boot images if test "x${sudoers_cfg}" = x; then sudoers_cfg=/etc/sudoers fi |
From: Bouchard, L. <Lou...@hp...> - 2007-06-26 16:11:35
|
Hi Chris & Al, > 1. It was unclear what to download > systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? >=20 > sugestion: > call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse On this issue, I'm also interested since I need to make a difference between the SystemDesigner RPM and rpms for the overlays. So far, I've used this : - systemdesigner for the main SystemDesigner RPM - sysdes-overlay-{distro} for the overlays This is only a working choice for me, so I'm open to any suggestion but it is indeed an issue that needs to be adressed. Regards, ...Louis --=20 Louis Bouchard, Linux Support Engineer EMEA Linux Competency Center, Linux Ambassador, HP HP Services 1 Ave du Canada HP France Z.A. de Courtaboeuf lou...@hp... 91 947 Les Ulis http://www.hp.com/go/linux France http://www.hp.com/fr |
From: walter h. <wh...@bf...> - 2007-06-27 08:42:20
|
hi louis, IMHO it is important to show the difference between a base package (must have) and a support package (nice to have). I think there is a consensus calling the base package "systemdesigner". (btw: does it contain a skeleton dist package ? ) I would call the rest "addon" this is that *I* would looking for, like the addon's for firefox/mozilla/... etc. The word "overlay" is problematic IMHO because *I* know that only in conjunction with graphics. re, wh Bouchard, Louis wrote: > Hi Chris & Al, > >> 1. It was unclear what to download >> systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? >> >> sugestion: >> call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse > > On this issue, I'm also interested since I need to make a difference > between the SystemDesigner RPM and rpms for the overlays. > > So far, I've used this : > > - systemdesigner for the main SystemDesigner RPM > - sysdes-overlay-{distro} for the overlays > > This is only a working choice for me, so I'm open to any suggestion but > it is indeed an issue that needs to be adressed. > > Regards, > > ...Louis > |
From: Bruno C. <Bru...@hp...> - 2007-06-27 11:46:52
|
Hello, Bouchard, Louis said on Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 06:10:55PM +0200: > > 1. It was unclear what to download > > systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? > >=20 > > sugestion: > > call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse >=20 > On this issue, I'm also interested since I need to make a difference > between the SystemDesigner RPM and rpms for the overlays. >=20 > So far, I've used this : >=20 > - systemdesigner for the main SystemDesigner RPM > - sysdes-overlay-{distro} for the overlays >=20 > This is only a working choice for me, so I'm open to any suggestion but > it is indeed an issue that needs to be adressed. Maybe it's time for naming conventions ;-) Looking at the repositories, I would suggest first that the version be removed from the name (it's part of the version field, not the name field, except for compatibility issues, but the tendency is then to rename the old one, e.g. apache =3D> apache1 and/or apache2). Also I think that version should follow a more traditional numbering schema, such as 4.0 for the lastest one, rather than 4 alone (as in fedora ;-) I'd agree with Louis that the main program package should be named systemdesigner (even if being an old Unix guy I prefer shorter name such as sysdes). As long as it doesn't conflict with other existing packages in distro, it's fine: [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .rpm | wc -l 1350237 [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .deb | wc -l 301768 [root@eurolinux ~]# locate sysdes | grep rpm [root@eurolinux ~]# Now even if I like short names, maybe it would be interesting to avoid any future ambiguity by prefixing with linuxcoe ? So linuxcoe-sysdes-4.0.noarch.rpm ? For other packages, as they concern distributions why not linuxcoe-distrib-rhel-4.0.noarch.rpm, linuxcoe-distrib-fedora-4.0.noarch.rpm, ... I'm not sure the term overlay is obvious for everybody. BTW, I'll need them very soon now ;-) WDYT ? Bruno. --=20 Linux Profession Lead EMEA / Open Source Evangelist \ HP C&I EMEA I= ET http://www.mondorescue.org / HP/Intel Solution Center \ http://hpintelco.n= et Des infos sur Linux? http://www.HyPer-Linux.org http://www.hp.com/lin= ux La musique ancienne? http://www.musique-ancienne.org http://www.medieval.o= rg |
From: walter h. <wh...@bf...> - 2007-06-27 12:22:51
|
Bruno Cornec wrote: > Hello, > > Bouchard, Louis said on Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 06:10:55PM +0200: > >>> 1. It was unclear what to download >>> systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? >>> >>> sugestion: >>> call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse >> On this issue, I'm also interested since I need to make a difference >> between the SystemDesigner RPM and rpms for the overlays. >> >> So far, I've used this : >> >> - systemdesigner for the main SystemDesigner RPM >> - sysdes-overlay-{distro} for the overlays >> >> This is only a working choice for me, so I'm open to any suggestion but >> it is indeed an issue that needs to be adressed. > > Maybe it's time for naming conventions ;-) > > Looking at the repositories, I would suggest first that the version be > removed from the name (it's part of the version field, not the name > field, except for compatibility issues, but the tendency is then to > rename the old one, e.g. apache => apache1 and/or apache2). Also I think > that version should follow a more traditional numbering schema, such as > 4.0 for the lastest one, rather than 4 alone (as in fedora ;-) > i agree :) is there any reason to start with 4 ? > I'd agree with Louis that the main program package should be named > systemdesigner (even if being an old Unix guy I prefer shorter name such > as sysdes). As long as it doesn't conflict with other existing packages > in distro, it's fine: > > > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .rpm | wc -l > 1350237 > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .deb | wc -l > 301768 > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate sysdes | grep rpm > [root@eurolinux ~]# > > Now even if I like short names, maybe it would be interesting to avoid > any future ambiguity by prefixing with linuxcoe ? > So linuxcoe-sysdes-4.0.noarch.rpm ? > sysdes -> SYStemDEScription ? no joke this was may first idea on this here my 2 cents (after asking google) sysdesign -> some companie with that name sysdesigner -> even software with that name (unrelated) systemdesigner -> even here some more for the more adventures: Linux-System-Designer for-> LSD4 and the addons: 4-rhel-lsd 4-fedora-lsd 4-suse-lsd 4-.... re, wh > For other packages, as they concern distributions why not > linuxcoe-distrib-rhel-4.0.noarch.rpm, > linuxcoe-distrib-fedora-4.0.noarch.rpm, ... > > I'm not sure the term overlay is obvious for everybody. > > BTW, I'll need them very soon now ;-) > > WDYT ? > Bruno. |
From: Bryan G. <Bry...@HP...> - 2007-06-27 13:11:00
|
FYI, > > Bouchard, Louis said on Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 06:10:55PM +0200: > > > >>> 1. It was unclear what to download > >>> systemdesigner-4 ? systemdesigner-opensuse-4 ? both ? As per the docs (see the Admin Guide), the required package is systemdesigner, with each of the other module packages adding more functionality. The core systemdesigner, while it can be installed standalone, would not provide anything visibily useful. > >>> sugestion: > >>> call it systemdesigner-4 and addon-4-opensuse > >> On this issue, I'm also interested since I need to make a difference > >> between the SystemDesigner RPM and rpms for the overlays. I'd be open to the "addon" moniker, but would prefer to have the systemdesigner name still appear, if nothing for the "grouping" effect it would have on (later) packaged installs. > >> So far, I've used this : > >> > >> - systemdesigner for the main SystemDesigner RPM > >> - sysdes-overlay-{distro} for the overlays > >> > >> This is only a working choice for me, so I'm open to any suggestion but > >> it is indeed an issue that needs to be adressed. > > > > Maybe it's time for naming conventions ;-) > > > > Looking at the repositories, I would suggest first that the version be > > removed from the name (it's part of the version field, not the name > > field, except for compatibility issues, but the tendency is then to > > rename the old one, e.g. apache => apache1 and/or apache2). Also I think > > that version should follow a more traditional numbering schema, such as > > 4.0 for the lastest one, rather than 4 alone (as in fedora ;-) > > i agree :) > is there any reason to start with 4 ? Actually yes re: 4 (since this project has been under development for over 7 years, we really are at version 4). And as for the standard numbering schema, it was always intended to become 4.0, at least when we offer packaged versions. And for subsequent minor revs, 4.1, ..., etc. > > I'd agree with Louis that the main program package should be named > > systemdesigner (even if being an old Unix guy I prefer shorter name such > > as sysdes). As long as it doesn't conflict with other existing packages > > in distro, it's fine: Heh, I have toggled many times with the sysdes vs. systemdesigner thinking. As I could find no legitimate limits specified either in rpm or deb packaging guidelines, I have currently opted for the longer name. And I have searched for both namespaces as widely as I could, and found no conflict on either. > > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .rpm | wc -l > > 1350237 > > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate .deb | wc -l > > 301768 > > [root@eurolinux ~]# locate sysdes | grep rpm > > [root@eurolinux ~]# > > > > Now even if I like short names, maybe it would be interesting to avoid > > any future ambiguity by prefixing with linuxcoe ? > > So linuxcoe-sysdes-4.0.noarch.rpm ? Interesting idea, as there may soon be some functionality beyond systemdesigner, in the LinuxCOE project umbrella. > sysdes -> SYStemDEScription ? no joke this was may first idea on this > > here my 2 cents (after asking google) > > sysdesign -> some companie with that name > sysdesigner -> even software with that name (unrelated) > systemdesigner -> even here some more > > > for the more adventures: > Linux-System-Designer for-> LSD4 > and the addons: > 4-rhel-lsd > 4-fedora-lsd > 4-suse-lsd > 4-.... Still, I prefer to have a common prefix for all the packages, again to make listing the components "more coherent and recognizable". And according to debian policy, package names must be lower case: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Package which prompted our recent migration from SystemDesigner to the current one. > > For other packages, as they concern distributions why not > > linuxcoe-distrib-rhel-4.0.noarch.rpm, > > linuxcoe-distrib-fedora-4.0.noarch.rpm, ... Perhaps, you might be confusing what the modules are for. They essentially provide the data/configuration to vend a particular distribution. This is irregardless of what distribution you install SystemDesigner on. So it's not like you would grab the fedora overlay to host it on Fedora, but rather if you wish to vend Fedora installations. > > I'm not sure the term overlay is obvious for everybody. > > > > BTW, I'll need them very soon now ;-) We are actively working on packages, that will cleanly install across as many distributions as we can. Until we are happy with the results (and various checking tools are too), we won't publish the packages. However, you are free to checkout the "packaging" module, and try to create some packages with the current artifacts. Feedback is more than welcome, bryang |