[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cobalt-developers] Bits flying over fences ...
- Subject: Re: [cobalt-developers] Bits flying over fences ...
- From: Anders <andersb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu Jun 12 00:54:00 2003
- List-id: Discussion Forum for developers on Sun Cobalt Networks products <cobalt-developers.list.cobalt.com>
Will DeHaan wrote:
>> Does this mean then that with some careful work we could produce a more
>> generic install of Cobalt Linux ? Perhaps based upon RedHat, and a
>> couple of additional rpms and we are on our way?
>
> Yes, this is close to my intention for the open source distribution.
>
> "Close" because I don't see Cobalt Linux as being the most cost-effective
> implementation for the appliancy management code. It would be great to
> see this codebase play well with modern Red Hat, Debian and Suse. That is
> a lot to ask for, of course. Oh, and Solaris x86 too ;-)
What is this "Cobalt Linux" anyway ? Here I thought it was Red Hat Linux,
with the Cobalt appliance management system software installed upon it ?
There are some kernel modules and custom hardware (LCD, sensors, etc)
of course, but otherwise it's mostly Red Hat 6.2 ? (with some 7.2 bits)
There's a lot of ported patches and such, but are all those needed now ?
Like you both say, the "new" codebase would probably do better assuming
a more *general* underlying Linux ? At least "vanilla" Red Hat 7.3...
And outside the Sun sphere, doesn't FreeBSD come before Solaris X86 ? :-)
This would make it all closer to Plesk's "PSA" or Ensim's "WEBppliance".
But I don't think the world needs another "Sun Linux 5.0" distribution ?
(which BTW didn't even last a year, but that is a whole other discussion)
> Regarding any missing software bits, please be very specific and I'll do
> what I can to track down the last few threads (puns, ugh) and with luck
> they'll qualify for public posting. The intention of this release is to
> provide ALL source that was not previously available for the Qube3 and to
> change its license for public use.
It is missing the source code for the CCE module for php.
(/usr/lib/apache/php/cce.so)
The source code for the I18N module for PHP *is* present.
(/usr/lib/apache/php/i18n.so)
That is, the C code module that defines the PHP functions:
ccephp_auth
ccephp_suspend
ccephp_authkey
ccephp_bye
ccephp_connect
ccephp_suspended
ccephp_begin
ccephp_commit
ccephp_create
ccephp_destroy
ccephp_endkey
ccephp_errors
ccephp_find
ccephp_findx
ccephp_get
ccephp_names
ccephp_new
ccephp_set
ccephp_whoami
ccephp_is_rollback
ccephp_handler_get
AFAIK, these are rather straightforward links into the clientlib ?
Oh, and there is a typo in both the "cce" directories Makefile!
It says TMPFILE=$$TMPDIR/cce-$(CCE_VERSION)-$(RPMRELEASE).tar.gz,
but only defines RPM_RELEASE ? i.e. There's an underscore missing.
There's a typo in the (somewhat annoying) boilerplate, too.
On the name of the current copyright holder itself, no less!
SUN MIDROSYSTEMS, INC ("SUN") <--- original spelling
--anders
BlackSun Inc.
http://www.blacksun.ca
PS.
"You acknowledge that this software is not designed or intended
for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of
any nuclear facility." (from the sun_bsd license, for Cobalt Qube OSS)
Now there's some food for thought? The "nuclear power plant appliance" ;-)
And here I thought that web and mail *servers* administered by people
not knowing any Linux Administration at all was somewhat dangerous...