Re: [gentoo-user] Re: s6 et al

[Dragostin Yanev <gentoo+user@netixen.com>]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 14:57:38 +0200
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03/10/2013 14:55, James wrote:
> > William Hubbs <williamh <at> gentoo.org> writes:
> > 
> > 
> >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:04:24AM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote:
> >>> Just stumbled across some very interesting software/ideas:
> >>>
> >>> http://skarnet.org/poweredby.html
> > 
> >> Yes, I have been looking at this for a few days, and some of the
> >> other members of the OpenRC team are interested in it as well.
> > 
> > I'm not too sure about the kernel sources:
> > "is provided by Gandi and cannot be modified"
> 
> That's a GPL violation right there.

Hi,
I think you are misreading that sentence out of it's context.
The context as I read it states that the hosting server is a VPS leased
by Gandi and they don't have control over the kernel (openvz, lxc,
containers, etc..).


> 
> The developer absolutely totally cannot do that. He/she may refuse to
> provide support if the kernel image is not what is shipped, but by
> using Linux they have already bound themselves to an agreement that
> the sources must be provided and be modifiable. And, they have to
> host the sources on their own network or provide them on demand
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > My experiences with embedded *nix is that the kernel sources
> > are tinkered with, almost constantly to infinity......
> > 
> > You'd be wise to post to the gentoo-embedded group, where
> > those learking in the shadows (memory crevaces) have
> > lots of experiences with a multitude of embedded ventures.
> > 
> > Most embedded ventures end up on the waste heap; they made
> > critical decision that leave the effort..........borked.
> > I'd research into the coding+user community, as being 
> > naked and alone on an embedded vetnure, does give rise to
> > abandonment.   
> > 
> > Another consideration is the processor architecture(s) that 
> > the codebase runs on. Most embedded and high end processor
> > efforts are looking at LOW POWER architectures, as the thrust
> > of all future efforts. This means on ARM or ARM+x86 or such.
> > 
> > 
> > That said, the project does look attractive.
> > 
> > caveat emptor.
> > hth,
> > James
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>