[gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[John Davis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 510 bytes --]

Hey all -
SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 

Cheers,
-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 4F9E 41F6 D072 5C1A 636C  2D46 B92C 4823 E281 41BB

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Jeffrey Forman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 781 bytes --]

I'm only concerned with this bloating the livecd past levels where they
still fit in traditional media without breaking out compression-fu to
get it working. to be honest, do that many people NEED samba support
during the installation of gentoo?

my 2 brain cells

-jeff

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 11:37, John Davis wrote:
> Hey all -
> SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 
> 
> Cheers,
-- 


--------------------
Jeffrey Forman
Gentoo Infrastructure
Gentoo Release Engin.
jforman@gentoo.org
--------------------

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1241 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 12:37, John Davis wrote:
> Hey all -
> SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 

Samba is not required to mount a SMB share, it just makes it easier and
allows for more ability.  I would venture to bet that the actual
stumbling block is BusyBox's mount not being as full-featured as the
real thing.

Also, you can mount NFS without nfs-utils... it is just SLOW as hell in
mounting, but it *will* mount.

Personally, I think having the full-blown samba on the LiveCD will add
*way* too much, unless we went and livecd/empty and livecd/rm'd
everything that wasn't absolutely necessary for mounting.  This does
take us down a slippery slope, as we'll soon enough have users
requesting us to keep the full package.

I think it requires more investigation into why, exactly, mounting a SMB
share does not work with the current LiveCD's.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Jason Huebel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 29 June 2004 12:22 pm, Jeffrey Forman wrote:
> I'm only concerned with this bloating the livecd past levels where they
> still fit in traditional media without breaking out compression-fu to
> get it working. to be honest, do that many people NEED samba support
> during the installation of gentoo?
>
> my 2 brain cells
>
> -jeff
>
> On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 11:37, John Davis wrote:
> > Hey all -
> > SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> > mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> > nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> > are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds?
> >
> > Cheers,

I'm on the fence on this one. I could see where a person might want to grab 
the stage tarball off of another machine (that perhaps has a windows or samba 
share), but other than that I don't see much use for it...

- -- 
Jason Huebel
Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead
Gentoo Developer Relations/Recruiter

GPG Public Key:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA9E230

"Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand."
Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA4aczbNgbbJup4jARAq9IAJ9+3cEF9rgApMQrOun51cIkyVqJ7wCgq2SI
kLuWZWD+Q0Ksh6m0VDTBxRA=
=iWvx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 679 bytes --]

Jason Huebel wrote:

> I'm on the fence on this one. I could see where a person might want to grab 
> the stage tarball off of another machine (that perhaps has a windows or samba 
> share), but other than that I don't see much use for it...

Long shot, but maybe put up a poll or question in the forums, and possibly post
something to -dev. I'd try and get a feel for how many users would really use
it. I mean, how can we tell how useful it is unless we ask?

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure

---
Public GPG key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 187 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 898 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 13:39, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Long shot, but maybe put up a poll or question in the forums, and possibly post
> something to -dev. I'd try and get a feel for how many users would really use
> it. I mean, how can we tell how useful it is unless we ask?

If it is not necessary, it is cruft.  It is also one more thing that we
will have to verify working before each release.  Personally, I would
like to see the reduction in the number of special items being added to
every LiveCD, rather than increase them.  Perhaps we could also spit out
a "jumbo" CD and distribute it via BT with all of the fun stuff on it,
like distcc and samba, that we get requests for all the time but are
unable to fill due to space requirements on the normal CDs.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Jason Huebel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 29 June 2004 12:39 pm, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Jason Huebel wrote:
> > I'm on the fence on this one. I could see where a person might want to
> > grab the stage tarball off of another machine (that perhaps has a windows
> > or samba share), but other than that I don't see much use for it...
>
> Long shot, but maybe put up a poll or question in the forums, and possibly
> post something to -dev. I'd try and get a feel for how many users would
> really use it. I mean, how can we tell how useful it is unless we ask?

My concern with this approach is that as soon as you give users the option, 
they'll vote for adding on more feature bloat.

- -- 
Jason Huebel
Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead
Gentoo Developer Relations/Recruiter

GPG Public Key:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA9E230

"Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand."
Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA4bv4bNgbbJup4jARAkLuAJ9ZvIt1oE4fAHhRq6xIY4BYCG/5rgCeO7dw
gHiWkfq6hBFPCCksIUOxEWU=
=AtZi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 13:28, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Personally, I think having the full-blown samba on the LiveCD will add
> *way* too much, unless we went and livecd/empty and livecd/rm'd
> everything that wasn't absolutely necessary for mounting.  This does
> take us down a slippery slope, as we'll soon enough have users
> requesting us to keep the full package.

How much of "full-blown samba" is actually required to mount a samba
share?
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 767 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 14:58, Jason Huebel wrote:
> My concern with this approach is that as soon as you give users the option, 
> they'll vote for adding on more feature bloat.

Agreed.  It'll also be all of the users from America, with an Xbox, a
couple Windows machines, and a cable modem that'll ask for it.  The guy
on dial-up in Indonesia will be forced to download an ISO that is "x"
amount bigger, with nothing useful for him.

As I said, if there is a problem mounting SMB shares, we should fix it
(what about AFS? Coda? Where does it end?), but I'm definitely opposed
to adding the full-blown samba package to every LiveCD.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Bob Johnson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

It added over 25meg to the compressed livecd before.. 

						Bob

On Tuesday 29 June 2004 11:37 am, John Davis wrote:
> Hey all -
> SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds?
>
> Cheers,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA4eMOxJgsCy9JAX0RAia3AKCQ5BTQokbT7SDqifE9CB+N9F9erQCfaUpj
STqeJlPVI4+uT2gxkKiRuFs=
=PA9D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[John Davis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1172 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 12:37, John Davis wrote:
> Hey all -
> SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 
> 
> Cheers,

Here is the error that I am getting from the test4 LiveCD -

livecd root# mount -t smbfs -o username=johnd //x.x.x.x/user /mnt/gentoo
smbfs: mount_data version 1919251317 is not supported
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on //x.x.x.x/user,
	or too many mounted file systems

If we can do this without Samba, great, but if we can't, we need to
seriously evaluate adding it to the LiveCD. Earlier, someone in the
thread posed the question of its importance.  SMB shares compose the
majority of file shares out there, so we should be able to support it
fully ;)

Cheers,
-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 4F9E 41F6 D072 5C1A 636C  2D46 B92C 4823 E281 41BB

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Jeffrey Forman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1851 bytes --]

Maybe someone can clarify this for me..the LiveCD, is:

(1) the INSTALL cd we're all familiar with or
(2) a Knoppix-like cd that boots into Gnome/KDE/<insert wm>

If (1), honestly...does someone NEED samba upon the install? if they
have broadband, they can download the files anyways.

If (2), this would be the only situation where I could see sticking what
is required for samba on the cd. It gives the users the ability to test
the waters of how easily they can share files linux <-> Windows.

I guess I am just concerned with adding bloat (someone mentioned another
22MB) to the cd where it's just not needed.

my 1+1 cents,
-jeffrey

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 07:57, John Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 12:37, John Davis wrote:
> > Hey all -
> > SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> > mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> > nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> > are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> 
> Here is the error that I am getting from the test4 LiveCD -
> 
> livecd root# mount -t smbfs -o username=johnd //x.x.x.x/user /mnt/gentoo
> smbfs: mount_data version 1919251317 is not supported
> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on //x.x.x.x/user,
> 	or too many mounted file systems
> 
> If we can do this without Samba, great, but if we can't, we need to
> seriously evaluate adding it to the LiveCD. Earlier, someone in the
> thread posed the question of its importance.  SMB shares compose the
> majority of file shares out there, so we should be able to support it
> fully ;)
> 
> Cheers,
-- 


--------------------
Jeffrey Forman
Gentoo Infrastructure
Gentoo Release Engin.
jforman@gentoo.org
--------------------

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Jochen Maes]

Quoting Jeffrey Forman <jforman@gentoo.org>:

> Maybe someone can clarify this for me..the LiveCD, is:
> 
> (1) the INSTALL cd we're all familiar with or
> (2) a Knoppix-like cd that boots into Gnome/KDE/<insert wm>
> 
The first


> If (1), honestly...does someone NEED samba upon the install? if they
> have broadband, they can download the files anyways.

don't agree, nobody has broadband, and some of them have caps (amount of data
transferred. last release i got capped after 2 days (upping grp cd's to mirrors)

And i definitely put some files on my other systems... and access through SMB or
NFS.

-- 
"I am not bound to please thee with my answers."

---------------------------------
| Jochen Maes                   |
| Developer ppc/java            |
| Gentoo Linux                  |
| http://dev.gentoo.org/~sejo/  |
---------------------------------


--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3877 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:05, Jeffrey Forman wrote:
> Maybe someone can clarify this for me..the LiveCD, is:
> 
> (1) the INSTALL cd we're all familiar with or
> (2) a Knoppix-like cd that boots into Gnome/KDE/<insert wm>
> 
> If (1), honestly...does someone NEED samba upon the install? if they
> have broadband, they can download the files anyways.

Our LiveCD is definitely #1.  If we decide to provide a #2 type CD, it
will be different than our install media.  One day it may even become
the "default" installation media, but for now, we want to keep the CD as
simple as possible, while still enabling the user to utilize as many
resources as he has available.  That means the ability to mount SMB
shares.  We might need to look at what is necessary to add proper SMB
mounting support.  I see no reason at all for adding SMB *sharing*
support.

Now, looking at /sbin/mount.smbfs, which is a symlink to
/usr/bin/smbmount, we see that it is a:

$ file smbmount
smbmount: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for
GNU/Linux 2.4.1, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped

Now, let's look at what it is linked against.  This is on my work
machine, so of course, USE flags will modify this list some, but the
list is *quite* long here.

$ ldd smbmount
        linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
        libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x40023000)
        libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x40050000)
        libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x40062000)
        libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40076000)
        libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /usr/lib/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 (0x4007a000)
        libkrb5.so.3 => /usr/lib/libkrb5.so.3 (0x40090000)
        libk5crypto.so.3 => /usr/lib/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x400fc000)
        libcom_err.so.3 => /usr/lib/libcom_err.so.3 (0x40126000)
        libldap.so.2 => /usr/lib/libldap.so.2 (0x40129000)
        liblber.so.2 => /usr/lib/liblber.so.2 (0x40159000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40167000)
        /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
        libssl.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7 (0x40277000)
        libcrypto.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 (0x402a7000)

Now, I could see that adding a hefty weight to our install media.  If we
really need to add samba to the LiveCD, then I think that we need to
work something out.

Perhaps it could be us adding a minimal smbmount to the system via
livecd-tools and USE=samba?  I wouldn't have a problem with that, and it
wouldn't introduce the feared samba-client garbage that other
distributions are so fond of.  It would only get installed on the
LiveCD, and it would build independent of the system's USE, so we would
control the dependencies required.

How does this sound to everyone?

> If (2), this would be the only situation where I could see sticking what
> is required for samba on the cd. It gives the users the ability to test
> the waters of how easily they can share files linux <-> Windows.

I would definitely see the reasoning for adding a full-blown samba to
such a CD, as many people would be comparing us to Windows, and most
likely operating on a Windows network.

> I guess I am just concerned with adding bloat (someone mentioned another
> 22MB) to the cd where it's just not needed.

Bloat is very bad on our CD.  They are large enough as it is.  It is my
personal mission to try to reduce the size of the LiveCD, as it has
grown quite a bit since the 1.2 days.

I tend to think that a better solution now that we will have a BT
distribution system, would be to possibly come out with a few
specialized CDs, or even a "jumbo" CD with all the "extras" that we
don't want to add to the regular LiveCD.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1545 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:33, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Now, let's look at what it is linked against.  This is on my work
> machine, so of course, USE flags will modify this list some, but the
> list is *quite* long here.
> 
> $ ldd smbmount
>         linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
>         libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x40023000)
>         libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x40050000)
>         libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x40062000)
>         libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40076000)
>         libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /usr/lib/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 (0x4007a000)
>         libkrb5.so.3 => /usr/lib/libkrb5.so.3 (0x40090000)
>         libk5crypto.so.3 => /usr/lib/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x400fc000)
>         libcom_err.so.3 => /usr/lib/libcom_err.so.3 (0x40126000)
>         libldap.so.2 => /usr/lib/libldap.so.2 (0x40129000)
>         liblber.so.2 => /usr/lib/liblber.so.2 (0x40159000)
>         libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40167000)
>         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
>         libssl.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7 (0x40277000)
>         libcrypto.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 (0x402a7000)
> 
> Now, I could see that adding a hefty weight to our install media.  If we
> really need to add samba to the LiveCD, then I think that we need to
> work something out.

Also consider what USE flags you compiled samba with when making that
determination. Looks like you've got ldap and kerberos in USE, among
others.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2473 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:51, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:33, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > Now, let's look at what it is linked against.  This is on my work
> > machine, so of course, USE flags will modify this list some, but the
> > list is *quite* long here.

As you can see, I did take USE into consideration.  My point was really
just that samba can have quite a few dependencies, so we would want to
do something to control it.

> > 
> > $ ldd smbmount
> >         linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
> >         libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x40023000)
> >         libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x40050000)
> >         libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x40062000)
> >         libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40076000)
> >         libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /usr/lib/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 (0x4007a000)
> >         libkrb5.so.3 => /usr/lib/libkrb5.so.3 (0x40090000)
> >         libk5crypto.so.3 => /usr/lib/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x400fc000)
> >         libcom_err.so.3 => /usr/lib/libcom_err.so.3 (0x40126000)
> >         libldap.so.2 => /usr/lib/libldap.so.2 (0x40129000)
> >         liblber.so.2 => /usr/lib/liblber.so.2 (0x40159000)
> >         libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40167000)
> >         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
> >         libssl.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7 (0x40277000)
> >         libcrypto.so.0.9.7 => /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 (0x402a7000)
> > 
> > Now, I could see that adding a hefty weight to our install media.  If we
> > really need to add samba to the LiveCD, then I think that we need to
> > work something out.
> 
> Also consider what USE flags you compiled samba with when making that
> determination. Looks like you've got ldap and kerberos in USE, among
> others.

If we were to include samba, or more precisely smbmount and any
*required* libraries, we would want to make sure that we turned off any
support that wasn't necessary.  I would think we would want to compile
it with minimal options.  Would we even require pam and readline in
USE?  I tend to think we could get away with building from the
equivalent of USE=-* then only copying the smbmount and the required
libraries to the actual system.  We're looking for the equivalent of a
"samba-client" package, without actually adding one to the tree.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1180 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:57:29AM -0400 or thereabouts, John Davis wrote:
> If we can do this without Samba, great, but if we can't, we need to
> seriously evaluate adding it to the LiveCD. Earlier, someone in the
> thread posed the question of its importance.  SMB shares compose the
> majority of file shares out there, so we should be able to support it
> fully ;)

We should be making decisions based on user demand, not our perception of
user demand.  I searched for "samba livecd" on the forums and only found
one thread (out of over 1.25 million posts) where it was even discussed.[1]
That thread is almost 2 years old.  Searching the gentoo-user archives, I
didn't find a single thread where users were asking for samba support on
the livecd.  

Conversely, I have spoken to *several* people at the various LWEs who still
use the Gentoo Linux 1.2 installation CD.  Why?  Because it's ~15MB and
isn't loaded with bloat.  (their words, not mine)

I don't think the user demand is out there to support further increasing
the size of the LiveCD, especially with something as large as samba.

--kurt

[1] http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=24991

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[John Davis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1288 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:22, Jochen Maes wrote:
> Quoting Jeffrey Forman <jforman@gentoo.org>:
> 
> > Maybe someone can clarify this for me..the LiveCD, is:
> > 
> > (1) the INSTALL cd we're all familiar with or
> > (2) a Knoppix-like cd that boots into Gnome/KDE/<insert wm>
> > 
> The first
> 
> 
> > If (1), honestly...does someone NEED samba upon the install? if they
> > have broadband, they can download the files anyways.
> 
> don't agree, nobody has broadband, and some of them have caps (amount of data
> transferred. last release i got capped after 2 days (upping grp cd's to mirrors)
> 
> And i definitely put some files on my other systems... and access through SMB or
> NFS.

And don't forget backups too - many people use our LiveCDs as rescue
CDs.

Regardless, a solution needs to be found that satisfies our space
requirements (25 MB is way too big) and offers us the functionality that
we need. Chris (and others) mentioned a stripped down smbclient package.
Can we add a livecd USEflag to the samba ebuild and go from there?

Cheers,
-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 4F9E 41F6 D072 5C1A 636C  2D46 B92C 4823 E281 41BB

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1536 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 12:49, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> We should be making decisions based on user demand, not our perception of
> user demand.  I searched for "samba livecd" on the forums and only found
> one thread (out of over 1.25 million posts) where it was even discussed.[1]
> That thread is almost 2 years old.  Searching the gentoo-user archives, I
> didn't find a single thread where users were asking for samba support on
> the livecd.  

I agree.  While I do think it would be a worthwhile venture to include
the ability to mount a SMB share, it should definitely not come at the
cost of dramatically enlarging our LiveCD.

> Conversely, I have spoken to *several* people at the various LWEs who still
> use the Gentoo Linux 1.2 installation CD.  Why?  Because it's ~15MB and
> isn't loaded with bloat.  (their words, not mine)

I've been wondering what we can do to not only give users the
functionality that they need to install, but also to keep the CD small. 
I will be focusing even more on this for 2004.3 and beyond, as I feel
that we're now in the phase of stabilization for 2004.2 and don't want
to change what we have now too dramatically.  Sure, I'll test some new
stuff, but it won't go onto the CDs, simply because there isn't enough
time to test out new things for 2004.2 and ensure quality.  I would love
to see our CD go back below 32MB, and even lower, if possible.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 949 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 13:43, John Davis wrote:
> And don't forget backups too - many people use our LiveCDs as rescue
> CDs.

Like I said, I like the idea of a "jumbo" CD.  A CD with all the
"extras" that can be used for just about anything.

> Regardless, a solution needs to be found that satisfies our space
> requirements (25 MB is way too big) and offers us the functionality that
> we need. Chris (and others) mentioned a stripped down smbclient package.
> Can we add a livecd USEflag to the samba ebuild and go from there?

I would prefer to use the samba USE flag instead with livecd-tools.  The
reason is that we don't have to touch someone else's work, and I think
it would require a good bit of hacking to modify the samba ebuild to do
what we want, rather than to modify a package we fully control.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[John Davis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 14:02, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 13:43, John Davis wrote:
> > And don't forget backups too - many people use our LiveCDs as rescue
> > CDs.
> 
> Like I said, I like the idea of a "jumbo" CD.  A CD with all the
> "extras" that can be used for just about anything.
> 
> > Regardless, a solution needs to be found that satisfies our space
> > requirements (25 MB is way too big) and offers us the functionality that
> > we need. Chris (and others) mentioned a stripped down smbclient package.
> > Can we add a livecd USEflag to the samba ebuild and go from there?
> 
> I would prefer to use the samba USE flag instead with livecd-tools.  The
> reason is that we don't have to touch someone else's work, and I think
> it would require a good bit of hacking to modify the samba ebuild to do
> what we want, rather than to modify a package we fully control.

Works for me -
-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 4F9E 41F6 D072 5C1A 636C  2D46 B92C 4823 E281 41BB

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-releng] samba on the livecds

[Donnie Berkholz]

Chris Gianelloni said:
> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:51, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 09:33, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>> > Now, let's look at what it is linked against.  This is on my work
>> machine, so of course, USE flags will modify this list some, but the
>> list is *quite* long here.
>
> As you can see, I did take USE into consideration.  My point was really
> just that samba can have quite a few dependencies, so we would want to
> do something to control it.

Heh, sorry. I had a few drinks in me at the time (had just gotten back
from Five Points), and I must've forgotten what you wrote above.

Speaking of, thought you were gonna come up to Columbia at some point.

Donnie



--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list