| 1 |
On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 14:57:38 +0200 |
| 2 |
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 03/10/2013 14:55, James wrote: |
| 5 |
> > William Hubbs <williamh <at> gentoo.org> writes: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:04:24AM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote: |
| 9 |
> >>> Just stumbled across some very interesting software/ideas: |
| 10 |
> >>> |
| 11 |
> >>> http://skarnet.org/poweredby.html |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> >> Yes, I have been looking at this for a few days, and some of the |
| 14 |
> >> other members of the OpenRC team are interested in it as well. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > I'm not too sure about the kernel sources: |
| 17 |
> > "is provided by Gandi and cannot be modified" |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That's a GPL violation right there. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Hi, |
| 22 |
I think you are misreading that sentence out of it's context. |
| 23 |
The context as I read it states that the hosting server is a VPS leased |
| 24 |
by Gandi and they don't have control over the kernel (openvz, lxc, |
| 25 |
containers, etc..). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> The developer absolutely totally cannot do that. He/she may refuse to |
| 30 |
> provide support if the kernel image is not what is shipped, but by |
| 31 |
> using Linux they have already bound themselves to an agreement that |
| 32 |
> the sources must be provided and be modifiable. And, they have to |
| 33 |
> host the sources on their own network or provide them on demand |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> > |
| 38 |
> > My experiences with embedded *nix is that the kernel sources |
| 39 |
> > are tinkered with, almost constantly to infinity...... |
| 40 |
> > |
| 41 |
> > You'd be wise to post to the gentoo-embedded group, where |
| 42 |
> > those learking in the shadows (memory crevaces) have |
| 43 |
> > lots of experiences with a multitude of embedded ventures. |
| 44 |
> > |
| 45 |
> > Most embedded ventures end up on the waste heap; they made |
| 46 |
> > critical decision that leave the effort..........borked. |
| 47 |
> > I'd research into the coding+user community, as being |
| 48 |
> > naked and alone on an embedded vetnure, does give rise to |
| 49 |
> > abandonment. |
| 50 |
> > |
| 51 |
> > Another consideration is the processor architecture(s) that |
| 52 |
> > the codebase runs on. Most embedded and high end processor |
| 53 |
> > efforts are looking at LOW POWER architectures, as the thrust |
| 54 |
> > of all future efforts. This means on ARM or ARM+x86 or such. |
| 55 |
> > |
| 56 |
> > |
| 57 |
> > That said, the project does look attractive. |
| 58 |
> > |
| 59 |
> > caveat emptor. |
| 60 |
> > hth, |
| 61 |
> > James |
| 62 |
> > |
| 63 |
> > |
| 64 |
> > |
| 65 |
> > |
| 66 |
> > |
| 67 |
> > |
| 68 |
> |
| 69 |
> |
Archives