More OLPC spam :-) -- If you see a raft of "how do I make $something work in F9" questions from me on fedora-devel... the email below outlines what I am working on (in a nutshell, upgrading the School Server spin to F9). Help is deeply appreciated. While most stuff "just works", we have some significant challenges: - Networking infrastructure. Jerry has been helping lots, and any pointers into how to tweak the udev-triggered in ways that don't backfire... welcome! Not many people seem to be playing with it, and our setup has some "special needs". - Upgrade nicely. - Pungi/revisor configuration and scripts for a truly minimal install. - Kickstart / anaconda / firstboot tweaking. cheers, m ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:57 AM Subject: What's cooking in the XS pot this week (2008-08-26) To: XS Devel <server-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> xs-0.4 is out - so now we're on to xs-0.5. The plan for this week is to - Keep track of any issues on 0.4 -- please report them via Trac or post them here - Add an activity installation server -- which may be available for 0.4. Douglas is working on this. - Make an attempt to rebase on F9. This attempt is time-boxed - if by EoB Friday we have a reasonably well cooked F9-based XS installer, it's all go and xs-0.5 will be based on F9. If instead we have a pile of issues, we'll document the issues and ask for help, but we'll drop the F9 port from the xs-0.5 plans. This is a hard-nosed risk mgmt strategy. F9 gives us security support and a hopefully better build toolchain (anaconda, pungi and revisor seem to be in much better shape, bugs in the F7 versions have been a problem for us). On the other hand, it gives us no user-visible features, and issues with the rebase can be very time consuming to resolve. Reaching end-of-Sept with only a F9-based version with no new features for end users would be a bad scenario. Same date but with a buggy F9-based version and no new features is our worst case. My plan does not allow for either to happen :-) The other non-ideal scenario is a F7-based release with features, but with no security support. This is not the best, but on the risks map this is not as serious because most XS installs we are planning to support in deployments are _not_ on the internet -- they either have no WAN/Internet connection or they are behind NAT. Their value as targets and their exposure is very low. I know some readers care a lot about security, and I am deeply grateful that they do. If you are one of them, do your bit: help us make the F9 port a success. cheers, m -- martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx martin@xxxxxxxxxx -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
