gfxboot ???

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

Hai there,

Has anyone consider gfxboot ?
Ubuntu Live CD got the keyboard and language settings on it. I think
it's worth to consider, since Fedora unity is spreading Fedora Livecds
worldwide.
Here is an example, i've made:
http://chitlesh.googlepages.com/grub.iso
6MB

I'll be working on pushing gfxboot to FE!


Chitlesh
-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com

[J. Hartline]

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
>  Hai there,
>
>  Has anyone consider gfxboot ?
>  Ubuntu Live CD got the keyboard and language settings on it. I think
>  it's worth to consider, since Fedora unity is spreading Fedora Livecds
>  worldwide.
>  Here is an example, i've made:
>  http://chitlesh.googlepages.com/grub.iso
>  6MB
>
>  I'll be working on pushing gfxboot to FE! 
I just burned and booted that CD.. it
turns out it's a SuSE Linux 
gfxboot logo with the words
"SuSE Linux" at the top, while the boot entry is Fedora Core.
Was this intentional, or are you just displaying it's value as far as in 
graphics?

Also, I don't know about the other projects on this list, however 
Kadischi won't be using gfxboot unless
it resides in Core. Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for 
providing stock materal with Kadischi.

We already have stock bootsplash and additional memtest kernel.

J. Hartline

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

On 9/21/06, Jasper Hartline <jasperhartline(a)adelphia.net&gt; wrote:
>  I just burned and booted that CD.. it turns out it's a SuSE
> Linux
>  gfxboot logo with the words
>  "SuSE Linux" at the top, while the boot entry is Fedora Core.
>  Was this intentional, or are you just displaying it's value as far as in
>  graphics?
>  
Yes, that's intentional, i've used it as an example

>  Also, I don't know about the other projects on this list,
> however
>  Kadischi won't be using gfxboot unless
>  it resides in Core. 
Ok.

Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
>  providing stock materal with Kadischi. 
what makes you say so ?



-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com

[J. Hartline]

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
>  Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
> > providing stock materal with Kadischi.
>
>  what makes you say so ? 
Until Fedora Extras reside under the ssame umbrella as
Fedora Core, they 
are just that..
Fedora Extras.. not Fedora Core.

Why for the same reasons Fedora Extras aren't a part of Core.
J. Hartline

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Jasper Hartline schrieb:
>  Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> >> Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
> >> providing stock materal with Kadischi.
> > what makes you say so ?
>  Until Fedora Extras reside under the ssame umbrella as Fedora Core, they 
>  are just that..
>  Fedora Extras.. not Fedora Core. 
Well, Extras and Core are heavily tight together theses days and Core
and Extras are both under the umbrella of the Fedora Project Board. And
packages from Extras can even be in RHEL afaik.

So exactly why should Extra stuff not be suitable for Live-CDs produces
with Kadischi?

Cu
thl

[J. Hartline]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Jasper Hartline schrieb:
>   
>
> >Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> >    
> >
> >>>Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
> >>>providing stock materal with Kadischi.
> >>>        
> >>>
> >>what makes you say so ?
> >>      
> >>
> >Until Fedora Extras reside under the ssame umbrella as Fedora Core, they 
> >are just that..
> >Fedora Extras.. not Fedora Core.
> >    
> >
>
> Well, Extras and Core are heavily tight together theses days and Core
> and Extras are both under the umbrella of the Fedora Project Board. And
> packages from Extras can even be in RHEL afaik.
>
> So exactly why should Extra stuff not be suitable for Live-CDs produces
> with Kadischi?
>   
>  
I'm not in the business of violating Fedora Project policy, if one 
exists of this nature, that's why.

J. Hartline

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Jasper Hartline schrieb:
>  Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > Jasper Hartline schrieb:
> >> Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> >>>> Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
> >>>> providing stock materal with Kadischi.
> >>> what makes you say so ?
> >> Until Fedora Extras reside under the ssame umbrella as Fedora Core, they 
> >> are just that..
> >> Fedora Extras.. not Fedora Core.
> > Well, Extras and Core are heavily tight together theses days and Core
> > and Extras are both under the umbrella of the Fedora Project Board. And
> > packages from Extras can even be in RHEL afaik.
> > So exactly why should Extra stuff not be suitable for Live-CDs produces
> > with Kadischi?
>  I'm not in the business of violating Fedora Project policy, if one 
>  exists of this nature, that's why. 
/me is not sure if he understood this correctly. Probably my fault,
english isn't my native tongue

You mean there is a Fedora Project Policy that disallows to use the name
"Fedora" for Live-CDs that contain packages from Extras? Can you point
me to where that was written down please?

CU
thl

[J. Hartline]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Jasper Hartline schrieb:
>   
>
> >Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >    
> >
> >>Jasper Hartline schrieb:
> >>      
> >>
> >>>Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> >>>        
> >>>
> >>>>>Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for
> >>>>>providing stock materal with Kadischi.
> >>>>>            
> >>>>>
> >>>>what makes you say so ?
> >>>>          
> >>>>
> >>>Until Fedora Extras reside under the ssame umbrella as Fedora Core, they 
> >>>are just that..
> >>>Fedora Extras.. not Fedora Core.
> >>>        
> >>>
> >>Well, Extras and Core are heavily tight together theses days and Core
> >>and Extras are both under the umbrella of the Fedora Project Board. And
> >>packages from Extras can even be in RHEL afaik.
> >>So exactly why should Extra stuff not be suitable for Live-CDs produces
> >>with Kadischi?
> >>      
> >>
> >I'm not in the business of violating Fedora Project policy, if one 
> >exists of this nature, that's why.
> >    
> >
>
> /me is not sure if he understood this correctly. Probably my fault,
> english isn't my native tongue
>
> You mean there is a Fedora Project Policy that disallows to use the name
> "Fedora" for Live-CDs that contain packages from Extras? Can you point
> me to where that was written down please?
>   
>  
Do I look like part of the legal department?
I'll let someone else point you to it, if in fact a policy of this 
nature exists.
If there wasn't a policy of this nature, Fedora Extras wouldn't be 
Fedora Extras, it'd be Fedora Core.

J. Hartline

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jasper Hartline wrote:

>  Do I look like part of the legal department?
>  I'll let someone else point you to it, if in fact a policy of this 
>  nature exists. 
No. It doesnt.

>  If there wasn't a policy of this nature, Fedora Extras
> wouldn't be 
>  Fedora Extras, it'd be Fedora Core.
>   
Fedora Extras vs Fedora Core has nothing to do with any such policies.

Rahul

[J. Hartline]

Rahul wrote:

>  Jasper Hartline wrote:
>
> > Do I look like part of the legal department?
> > I'll let someone else point you to it, if in fact a policy of this 
> > nature exists.
>
>
>  No. It doesnt. 
Ok. I have been hearing that Fedora Extras is becoming part of Fedora 
Core soon..
I'm not sure when but this is what people are wanting to happen.

> > If there wasn't a policy of this nature, Fedora Extras
> wouldn't be 
> > Fedora Extras, it'd be Fedora Core.
> >
>  Fedora Extras vs Fedora Core has nothing to do with any such policies.
>  
Alright. Thanks.
Core does include alot of what is expected in the base of a distribution..
e.g. mission specific applications, like gcc vs. bittorrent.

J. Hartline

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jasper Hartline wrote:
>  Rahul wrote:
>  
> > Jasper Hartline wrote:
> >
> >> Do I look like part of the legal department?
> >> I'll let someone else point you to it, if in fact a policy of this 
> >> nature exists.
> >
> >
> > No. It doesnt.
>  
>  Ok. I have been hearing that Fedora Extras is becoming part of Fedora 
>  Core soon..
>  I'm not sure when but this is what people are wanting to happen. 
This is a bit offtopic for this list.

We have been working on a relatively long process of eliminating the 
differences between the repositories so developers involved in the 
project can work on any of the packages without any barriers.

Max Spevack mentioned this several times including 
http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/17/177220&from=rss. 
We dont have a specific timeline for a merge if any yet.

>  
> >> If there wasn't a policy of this nature, Fedora Extras wouldn't be 
> >> Fedora Extras, it'd be Fedora Core.
> >>
> > Fedora Extras vs Fedora Core has nothing to do with any such policies.
> >
>  Alright. Thanks.
>  Core does include alot of what is expected in the base of a distribution..
>  e.g. mission specific applications, like gcc vs. bittorrent.
>   
Right. We have a general guideline on that at 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CoreVsExtras

Rahul

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

>  You mean there is a Fedora Project Policy that disallows to use the
> name
>  "Fedora" for Live-CDs that contain packages from Extras? Can you point
>  me to where that was written down please? 
No such policy exists.

This is one of those areas where "explicit policy" is not well enough 
documented, but let me make the intention clear:

Any project that is comprised of component parts of Fedora, and *only* 
component parts of Fedora, has the right to be called Fedora.

Which means that a Fedora Live CD that has Core and Extras packages can be 
called a "Fedora Live CD".

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------

[Chris Negus]

On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 13:49 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  Which means that a Fedora Live CD that has Core and Extras packages
> can be 
>  called a "Fedora Live CD". 
Hi Greg. Does that also imply that it is okay to use Fedora labels
(logos and artwork) on live CDs that meet this requirement?

-- Chris Negus

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

It does.  Legal agrees with this in principle, so act according to this 
principle and you'll be fine.

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Chris Negus wrote:

>  On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 13:49 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  > Which means that a Fedora Live CD that has Core and Extras packages can be 
>  > called a "Fedora Live CD".
>  
>  Hi Greg. Does that also imply that it is okay to use Fedora labels
>  (logos and artwork) on live CDs that meet this requirement?
>  
>  -- Chris Negus
>  
>  
>  --
>  Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
>  Fedora-livecd-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
>

[Rahul Sundaram]

Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  It does.  Legal agrees with this in principle, so act according to
> this 
>  principle and you'll be fine.
>   
Are we getting the actual guidelines changed to reflect this?


>  
> > On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 13:49 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> >> Which means that a Fedora Live CD that has Core and Extras packages can be 
> >> called a "Fedora Live CD".
> > Hi Greg. Does that also imply that it is okay to use Fedora labels
> > (logos and artwork) on live CDs that meet this requirement?
> >
> > -- Chris Negus
> > 
Just to clarify, it would have to be exclusive any combination of 
core+extras.

Rahul

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Rahul wrote:

>  Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  > It does.  Legal agrees with this in principle, so act according to this 
>  > principle and you'll be fine.
>  > 
>  
>  Are we getting the actual guidelines changed to reflect this? 
 
At some point, when it's a high enough priority for me or Max to sit in 
legal's office for hours on end, drafting and redrafting proposals.  But 
for now, an agreement in principle is enough for me.

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------

[Chris Negus]

On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 13:46 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Rahul wrote:
>  
>  > Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>  > > It does.  Legal agrees with this in principle, so act according to this 
>  > > principle and you'll be fine.
>  > Are we getting the actual guidelines changed to reflect this?
>   
>  At some point, when it's a high enough priority for me or Max to sit in 
>  legal's office for hours on end, drafting and redrafting proposals.  But 
>  for now, an agreement in principle is enough for me. 
Thanks for clarifying this. Even this high-level guidance is very
helpful. For that longer legal discussion some day, please ask if
something is still a Fedora live CD if someone...

* Changes the splash screen, background, or other cosmetic features.
* Has a Fedora live CD coexist with another live CD on the same medium.

When I have made Fedora live CDs in the past, I've just left the logos
off because I wasn't clear about these things. It might be worth it for
me to drop special splash screens and NTFS support (for our poor, lost
Windows dual booters) to legally use the logos.

-- Chris Negus

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

On 9/22/06, Chris Negus <cnegus(a)rucls.net&gt; wrote:
>  Thanks for clarifying this. Even this high-level guidance is very
>  helpful. For that longer legal discussion some day, please ask if
>  something is still a Fedora live CD if someone...
>
>  * Changes the splash screen, background, or other cosmetic features. 
Yes, only if these are already in Fedora Extras.
No, if these are not in Fedora Extras

>  * Has a Fedora live CD coexist with another live CD on the same
> medium. 
To my opinion, the answer is No !
Why ? because the other livecd as you said, is not in Fedora Extras.
Perhaps you have 2 or more Fedora Core (unmodified) on the same
medium, then it might be yes

Chitlesh
-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com

[J. Hartline]

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
>  On 9/22/06, Chris Negus <cnegus(a)rucls.net&gt; wrote:
> > * Has a Fedora live CD coexist with another live CD on the same medium.
>
>  To my opinion, the answer is No !
>  Why ? because the other livecd as you said, is not in Fedora Extras.
>  Perhaps you have 2 or more Fedora Core (unmodified) on the same
>  medium, then it might be yes
>  
You've misunderstood his question.

It is perfectly legal to provide a 'legal Fedora Core LiveCD' on the 
same medium as another LiveCD.
e.g. a DVD with Knoppix, Fedora Core LiveCD, Gentoo LiveCD, or any other 
Live system.

That's what he meant.
J. Hartline

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

On 9/23/06, Jasper Hartline <jasperhartline(a)adelphia.net&gt; wrote:
>  You've misunderstood his question. 
No, I've understood it.

>  It is perfectly legal to provide a 'legal Fedora Core LiveCD'
> on the
>  same medium as another LiveCD.
>  e.g. a DVD with Knoppix, Fedora Core LiveCD, Gentoo LiveCD, or any other
>  Live system. 
How about the grub/isolinux ? will they have fedora artwork on it ?

-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com

[J. Hartline]

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> >
> > same medium as another LiveCD.
> > e.g. a DVD with Knoppix, Fedora Core LiveCD, Gentoo LiveCD, or any other
> > Live system.
>
>  How about the grub/isolinux ? will they have fedora artwork on it ?
>  
He isn't talking about calling the medium a Fedora Live CD.. he is 
talking about the Fedora LiveCD in the medium.

J. Hartline

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

Ok, after so many discussions, I came back to my initial proposition
(at least for kadischi and livecds for the moment).

Let's assume, I'll package gfxboot for FE!

Is it worth to consider using  gfxboot in Kadischi and fedora livecds ?
If yes, i'll package gfxboot for FE.


To me, it won't be a problem for gfxboot to be approved for FE.
from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CoreVsExtras
What sort of things are more appropriate for Fedora Extras?
    * Duplications of already-existing Core functionality, even if
some new functionality is added
Thorsten is our man for more details.

Having an easy and quick feature to set keyboard layout and language,
right in the beginning would be fairly advantageous for such a big
project like fedora, in terms of marketing. To my point of view, it
would be easier and quicker to make fedora localised if ppl have more
access to it.

gfxboot could be used as grub feature we've recently added to kadischi
and we still have the choice to you memtest+.

But in the other hand, someone got to work on gfxboot and understand
how it works.

Chitlesh
-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com

[J. Hartline]

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
>  Ok, after so many discussions, I came back to my initial proposition
>  (at least for kadischi and livecds for the moment).
>
>  Let's assume, I'll package gfxboot for FE!
>
>  Is it worth to consider using  gfxboot in Kadischi and fedora livecds ?
>  If yes, i'll package gfxboot for FE. 
Yes, absolutely, it can be another
bootloader type option.
Greg an Rahul have pointed out it is feasible and most important legal.
>  But in the other hand, someone got to work on gfxboot and understand
>  how it works. 
I'll take a look at it, first get it into Extras and we can add
it's 
functionality to Kadischi.

J. Hartline

[David Zeuthen]

On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 06:54 -0500, Jasper Hartline wrote:
>  Also, I don't know about the other projects on this list, however
>
>  Kadischi won't be using gfxboot unless
>  it resides in Core. Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for 
>  providing stock materal with Kadischi. 
Why this policy? Just curious..

>  We already have stock bootsplash and additional memtest kernel.
Are these in Core? Or even Extras?

    David

[J. Hartline]

David Zeuthen wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 06:54 -0500, Jasper Hartline wrote:
>   
>
> >Also, I don't know about the other projects on this list, however 
> >Kadischi won't be using gfxboot unless
> >it resides in Core. Even Fedora Extras products are a no-go for 
> >providing stock materal with Kadischi.
> >    
> >
>
> Why this policy? Just curious..
>
>   
>
> >We already have stock bootsplash and additional memtest kernel.
> >    
> >
>
> Are these in Core? Or even Extras?
>
>     David
>   
>  
Memtest is, 
http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/5/i386/os/Fedora/RPMS/memtest86+-1....
Which is Core.

The splash.lss is in 
http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/5/i386/os/Fedora/RPMS/fedora-logos-...
Which is Core.

J. Hartline