10:34 a.m.
Hello
Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for
Fedora 12 planned)?
The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO
for jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora
11 installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary
configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration
of the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number
should be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice
of having the same version number for all kernel types makes it very
easy for graphic driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be
booted with either kernel type for testing purposes.
Regards, Simon.
9:23 p.m.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
Hello
Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora
12 planned)?
The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for
jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11
installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary
configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration of
the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should
be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having
the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic
driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel
type for testing purposes.
Regards, Simon.
Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
generate and maintain a spin.
Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
spin is Fedora based.
We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
Orcan
4:08 a.m.
Hello Orcan
Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos
(Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin:
(1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time" kernel
- although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be used
effectively with the standard kernel)
(2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning
the users to the group that has real-time priority.
With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always
be available in the standard Fedora repository. Indeed the standard and
enhanced pre-emption kernels should always have the same version number
to maintain compatibility with the graphic drivers etc.. It would be
very little additional work for the kernel compilers to generate the
kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard kernel (This is
standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu - since 8.10).
Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do
this manually as well.
I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling updates".
That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one
reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to
rolling updates.
As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora
distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion or
PlanetCCRMA or Livna
Regards, Simon
Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
> Hello
>
> Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora
> 12 planned)?
>
> The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for
> jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11
> installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
>
> For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary
> configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
> Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration
of
> the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
>
> Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should
> be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having
> the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic
> driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel
> type for testing purposes.
>
>
> Regards, Simon.
>
>
>
Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
generate and maintain a spin.
Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
spin is Fedora based.
We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
Orcan
6:56 a.m.
On 11/08/2009 09:08 PM, Simon Lewis wrote:
Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3
repos
(Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin:
Wait, firstly the spin couldn't be hosted at Fedora if it came with
rpmfusion (or ccrma) repo enabled or with items that are not in Fedora
(ie in rpmfusion or ccrma).
I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
RPMFusion repos
Sounds like we have a volunteer for continuing the effort to tidy
up
ccrma packages to fit with fedora, or failing that rpm fusion.
The packages still need third party licensing examination, review
requests, and resolving problems.
We have a list, and Orcan and myself eg picked up a few, but there is a
non-trivial process to be followed; manpower is welcome...
Actually, isn't a spin really a live cd ? Would having the low level
capability active, and apps installed provide anything like a realistic
scenario for budding musicians, when apps need to be loaded from a
livecd image ?
It would also be unclear how many useful things we could fit in a CD
size image (ie by expelling games|graphics|internet (most)|office) ?
Cheers, DaveT.
7:51 p.m.
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
Hello Orcan
Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos
(Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin:
(1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time"
kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be
used effectively with the standard kernel)
(2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning
the users to the group that has real-time priority.
Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and
the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in
Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody)
make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box.
With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should
always
be available in the standard Fedora repository.
Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work.
Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always
have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the
graphic drivers etc..
That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish
in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that.
Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x
kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that
matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to
rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would have
happened already.
It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to
generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard
kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu -
since 8.10).
That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past.
Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the
resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely
do not want to have two kernels in Fedora.
As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that
means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging
kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-)
Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to
do
this manually as well.
I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling updates".
That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one
reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to
rolling updates.
Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster
than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update
means?
-- Fernando
As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora
distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion
or PlanetCCRMA or Livna
Regards, Simon
Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora
> > 12 planned)?
> >
> > The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for
> > jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11
> > installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
> >
> > For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary
> > configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
> > Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy
configuration of
> > the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
> >
> > Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should
> > be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having
> > the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic
> > driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel
> > type for testing purposes.
> >
> >
> > Regards, Simon.
> >
> >
> >
> Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
> generate and maintain a spin.
>
> Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
> RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
> The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
> spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
> spin is Fedora based.
>
> We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
>
> Orcan
1:05 p.m.
Hello Fernando,
Apologies, I have seemed to stepped on a few toes here... Unfortunately
for best operation of my laptop I need a the kernel >2.6.30.x
You are right nothing is easy, on the other hand given that most of (if
not all??) the developers supplying patches to the real-time branch of
the Linux kernel are Red-Hat employees. At least that's what the press
says - I thought Fedora would have the best chance of maintaining an up
to date rt kernel in their repo.
As to packaging, it would be a great step forward if fedora / rpmfusion
were to have an open-build service like openSUSE. The projects still
have to be entered into build service but the time compiling the
different architecture / distribution versions is reduced by build servers.
Regards, Simon
Am 10.11.2009 02:51, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano:
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
> Hello Orcan
>
> Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos
> (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
> differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin:
>
> (1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time"
> kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be
> used effectively with the standard kernel)
>
> (2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning
> the users to the group that has real-time priority.
>
Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and
the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in
Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody)
make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box.
> With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always
> be available in the standard Fedora repository.
>
Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work.
> Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always
> have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the
> graphic drivers etc..
>
That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish
in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that.
Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x
kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that
matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to
rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would have
happened already.
> It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to
> generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard
> kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu -
> since 8.10).
>
That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past.
Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the
resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely
do not want to have two kernels in Fedora.
As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that
means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging
kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-)
> Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do
> this manually as well.
>
> I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
> RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling updates".
> That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one
> reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to
> rolling updates.
>
Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster
than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update
means?
-- Fernando
> As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora
> distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion
> or PlanetCCRMA or Livna
>
> Regards, Simon
>
>
>
> Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora
>>> 12 planned)?
>>>
>>> The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for
>>> jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11
>>> installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
>>>
>>> For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary
>>> configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
>>> Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy
configuration of
>>> the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
>>>
>>> Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should
>>> be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having
>>> the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic
>>> driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel
>>> type for testing purposes.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards, Simon.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
>> generate and maintain a spin.
>>
>> Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
>> RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
>> The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
>> spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
>> spin is Fedora based.
>>
>> We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
>>
>> Orcan
>>
2:17 p.m.
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 20:05 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
Hello Fernando,
Apologies, I have seemed to stepped on a few toes here...
Sorry if I gave that impression, that's not what I felt.
Unfortunately for best operation of my laptop I need a the kernel
>2.6.30.x
The latest rt patches are for 2.6.31 and I'm following that new set of
patches with internal builds. So far so good (just today 2.6.31.6-rt19
came out). For running 2.6.31.x on < fc12 you need to disable modeset as
the userland programs are too old (ie: "nomodeset" in the kernel boot
line) and that has delayed me putting out a version for testing.
I tried a patch to disable that internally in the kernel and was not
successful (I can't really automatically add nomodeset to the grub boot
line because then normal fedora kernels will pick that up afterwards and
you don't want that happening).
You are right nothing is easy, on the other hand given that most of
(if not all??) the developers supplying patches to the real-time
branch of the Linux kernel are Red-Hat employees. At least that's what
the press says - I thought Fedora would have the best chance of
maintaining an up to date rt kernel in their repo.
That would have been my guess as well. But the feedback I got from them
was not like that. Hopefully that will change over time...
As to packaging, it would be a great step forward if fedora /
rpmfusion were to have an open-build service like openSUSE. The
projects still have to be entered into build service but the time
compiling the different architecture / distribution versions is
reduced by build servers.
Both projects have "open" build servers. I don't know if the definition
of "open" would match yours, but you can become a contributor and
packager in both of them. I don't know how the openSUSE servers work.
Best.
-- Fernando
Am 10.11.2009 02:51, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano:
> On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
>
> > Hello Orcan
> >
> > Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos
> > (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
> > differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type
spin:
> >
> > (1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time"
> > kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be
> > used effectively with the standard kernel)
> >
> > (2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning
> > the users to the group that has real-time priority.
> >
> Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and
> the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in
> Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody)
> make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box.
>
>
> > With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always
> > be available in the standard Fedora repository.
> >
> Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work.
>
>
> > Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always
> > have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the
> > graphic drivers etc..
> >
> That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish
> in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that.
> Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x
> kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that
> matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to
> rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would have
> happened already.
>
>
> > It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to
> > generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard
> > kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu -
> > since 8.10).
> >
> That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past.
> Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the
> resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely
> do not want to have two kernels in Fedora.
>
> As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that
> means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging
> kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-)
>
>
> > Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do
> > this manually as well.
> >
> > I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
> > RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling
updates".
> > That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one
> > reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to
> > rolling updates.
> >
> Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster
> than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update
> means?
>
> -- Fernando
>
>
>
> > As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora
> > distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion
> > or PlanetCCRMA or Livna
> >
> > Regards, Simon
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hello
> > > >
> > > > Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for
Fedora
> > > > 12 planned)?
> > > >
> > > > The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the
RT-PRIO for
> > > > jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora
11
> > > > installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
> > > >
> > > > For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other
necessary
> > > > configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
> > > > Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy
configuration of
> > > > the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
> > > >
> > > > Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number
should
> > > > be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of
having
> > > > the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for
graphic
> > > > driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either
kernel
> > > > type for testing purposes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Simon.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
> > > generate and maintain a spin.
> > >
> > > Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
> > > RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
> > > The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
> > > spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
> > > spin is Fedora based.
> > >
> > > We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
> > >
> > > Orcan
> > >
>
>
>
11:57 a.m.
Hello Fernando
Thanks for the positive feedback, I'm looking forward to the final
release F12, I tried the kde live beta and was surprised how fast it is.
As soon as I have the final F12 installed I will try your rt kernel
(2.6.31.6-rt19).
I notice that openSUSE are now shipping - as standard with 11.2- a
desktop kernel (2.6.31) with full pre-emption, 1000Hz clock and PAE.
(See
http://www.linux-community.de/Internal/Artikel/Online-Artikel/Open-Source...).
Where do I find the open build servers in Fedora / RPMFusion? By open
build (with openSUSE) you can create one or more projects on openSUSE's
server and the server is used to compile the sources based on your
configuration settings. Whilst the input of the data and the
configuration of the project takes time their seems to be an advantage
in that the different architectures can be compiled in one run.
Given that each each distribution suffers for the lack of packages any
method to improve efficiency must surely be considered. It's probably
just another Utopia but has RPMFusion and Packman considered combining
resources for example?
Regards, Simon
Am 10.11.2009 21:17, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano:
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 20:05 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
> Hello Fernando,
> Apologies, I have seemed to stepped on a few toes here...
>
Sorry if I gave that impression, that's not what I felt.
> Unfortunately for best operation of my laptop I need a the kernel
>
>> 2.6.30.x
>>
The latest rt patches are for 2.6.31 and I'm following that new set of
patches with internal builds. So far so good (just today 2.6.31.6-rt19
came out). For running 2.6.31.x on< fc12 you need to disable modeset as
the userland programs are too old (ie: "nomodeset" in the kernel boot
line) and that has delayed me putting out a version for testing.
I tried a patch to disable that internally in the kernel and was not
successful (I can't really automatically add nomodeset to the grub boot
line because then normal fedora kernels will pick that up afterwards and
you don't want that happening).
> You are right nothing is easy, on the other hand given that most of
> (if not all??) the developers supplying patches to the real-time
> branch of the Linux kernel are Red-Hat employees. At least that's what
> the press says - I thought Fedora would have the best chance of
> maintaining an up to date rt kernel in their repo.
>
That would have been my guess as well. But the feedback I got from them
was not like that. Hopefully that will change over time...
> As to packaging, it would be a great step forward if fedora /
> rpmfusion were to have an open-build service like openSUSE. The
> projects still have to be entered into build service but the time
> compiling the different architecture / distribution versions is
> reduced by build servers.
>
Both projects have "open" build servers. I don't know if the definition
of "open" would match yours, but you can become a contributor and
packager in both of them. I don't know how the openSUSE servers work.
Best.
-- Fernando
> Am 10.11.2009 02:51, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano:
>
>> On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hello Orcan
>>>
>>> Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos
>>> (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2
>>> differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type
spin:
>>>
>>> (1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time"
>>> kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be
>>> used effectively with the standard kernel)
>>>
>>> (2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning
>>> the users to the group that has real-time priority.
>>>
>>>
>> Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and
>> the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in
>> Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody)
>> make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box.
>>
>>
>>
>>> With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always
>>> be available in the standard Fedora repository.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always
>>> have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the
>>> graphic drivers etc..
>>>
>>>
>> That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish
>> in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that.
>> Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x
>> kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that
>> matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to
>> rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would
have
>> happened already.
>>
>>
>>
>>> It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to
>>> generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard
>>> kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu -
>>> since 8.10).
>>>
>>>
>> That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past.
>> Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the
>> resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely
>> do not want to have two kernels in Fedora.
>>
>> As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that
>> means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging
>> kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>> Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do
>>> this manually as well.
>>>
>>> I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and
>>> RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling
updates".
>>> That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one
>>> reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to
>>> rolling updates.
>>>
>>>
>> Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster
>> than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update
>> means?
>>
>> -- Fernando
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora
>>> distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion
>>> or PlanetCCRMA or Livna
>>>
>>> Regards, Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for
Fedora
>>>>> 12 planned)?
>>>>>
>>>>> The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the
RT-PRIO for
>>>>> jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora
11
>>>>> installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other
necessary
>>>>> configuration settings must be taken care of in the background.
>>>>> Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy
configuration of
>>>>> the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written.
>>>>>
>>>>> Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number
should
>>>>> be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of
having
>>>>> the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for
graphic
>>>>> driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either
kernel
>>>>> type for testing purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Simon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to
>>>> generate and maintain a spin.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora,
>>>> RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA?
>>>> The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the
>>>> spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the
>>>> spin is Fedora based.
>>>>
>>>> We need ideas, manpower, time etc...
>>>>
>>>> Orcan
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
12:19 p.m.
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 18:57 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
Hello Fernando
Thanks for the positive feedback, I'm looking forward to the final
release F12, I tried the kde live beta and was surprised how fast it
is. As soon as I have the final F12 installed I will try your rt
kernel (2.6.31.6-rt19).
It will not be available immediately, there will be an announcement in
the Planet CCRMA list when stuff in the fc12 branch is testable (it
takes me a while to get up to speed after a new release, how long it
takes depends on how busy I am and any roadblocks and surprises I get
when building on the new release).
I notice that openSUSE are now shipping - as standard with 11.2- a
desktop kernel (2.6.31) with full pre-emption, 1000Hz clock and PAE.
(See
http://www.linux-community.de/Internal/Artikel/Online-Artikel/Open-Source...).
Where do I find the open build servers in Fedora / RPMFusion? By open
build (with openSUSE) you can create one or more projects on
openSUSE's server and the server is used to compile the sources based
on your configuration settings. Whilst the input of the data and the
configuration of the project takes time their seems to be an advantage
in that the different architectures can be compiled in one run.
In the case of Fedora you have to become a contributor:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join
and more specifically:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
I presume the process is similar on RPMFusion.
Given that each each distribution suffers for the lack of packages
any
method to improve efficiency must surely be considered.
There is a tradeoff between efficiency and security. You don't
automatically become a contributor and are able to build and release
packages, basically you have to earn trust (others have to review your
package before you can even think on building it, etc, etc).
-- Fernando
It's probably just another Utopia but has RPMFusion and Packman
considered combining resources for example?
Regards, Simon
Am 10.11.2009 21:17, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano:
> On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 20:05 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote:
>
> > Hello Fernando,
> > Apologies, I have seemed to stepped on a few toes here...
> >
> Sorry if I gave that impression, that's not what I felt.
>
>
> > Unfortunately for best operation of my laptop I need a the kernel
> >
> > > 2.6.30.x
> > >
> The latest rt patches are for 2.6.31 and I'm following that new set of
> patches with internal builds. So far so good (just today 2.6.31.6-rt19
> came out). For running 2.6.31.x on < fc12 you need to disable modeset as
> the userland programs are too old (ie: "nomodeset" in the kernel boot
> line) and that has delayed me putting out a version for testing.
>
> I tried a patch to disable that internally in the kernel and was not
> successful (I can't really automatically add nomodeset to the grub boot
> line because then normal fedora kernels will pick that up afterwards and
> you don't want that happening).
>
> > You are right nothing is easy, on the other hand given that most of
> > (if not all??) the developers supplying patches to the real-time
> > branch of the Linux kernel are Red-Hat employees. At least that's what
> > the press says - I thought Fedora would have the best chance of
> > maintaining an up to date rt kernel in their repo.
> >
> That would have been my guess as well. But the feedback I got from them
> was not like that. Hopefully that will change over time...
>
>
> > As to packaging, it would be a great step forward if fedora /
> > rpmfusion were to have an open-build service like openSUSE. The
> > projects still have to be entered into build service but the time
> > compiling the different architecture / distribution versions is
> > reduced by build servers.
> >
> Both projects have "open" build servers. I don't know if the
definition
> of "open" would match yours, but you can become a contributor and
> packager in both of them. I don't know how the openSUSE servers work.
>
> Best.
6:15 p.m.
On 11/13/2009 05:19 AM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> Where do I find the open build servers in Fedora / RPMFusion? By
open
> build (with openSUSE) you can create one or more projects on
> openSUSE's server and the server is used to compile the sources based
> on your configuration settings.
If you mean rpm .spec files then yes it's
similar.
However, you can not be any random hacker/cracker of the street ;-)
You create a .spec for the thing you want to package, and submit a
review request. In time, one or more reviewers help you to knock the
spec into a form where it meets the fedora / rpm fusion packaging
guidelines.
At this point, they also request that you perform pre-reviews of other
packager's efforts. This is to show that you understand the process and
guidelines (in your case, consider some other music packages - ie
similar interest). At this stage an overseeing sponsor takes a look at
your package Review request and decides if you have learnt enough to be
accepted as a packager.
It isn't that hard; but it is a little more difficult that extract,
config, make, make install. The final result must: work on multiple
architectures, be able to build from source, and fit with packaging
guidelines which aim to stop packages stepping on each other's toes.
> Whilst the input of the data and the
> configuration of the project takes time their seems to be an advantage
> in that the different architectures can be compiled in one run.
Yes, Fedora and
RPM Fusion build requests do builds for multiple
supported arch (i686, x86_64, ppc). There are other build servers for
less commmon architectures like s390x and arm.
In the case of Fedora you have to become a contributor:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join
and more specifically:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
I presume the process is similar on RPMFusion.
In fact, once you have become a
packager for Fedora, you need to create
yourself a fas account in RPM Fusion, then submit your Review Request,
mentioning that you are already a Fedora packager.
Please query in your Review Request, and on an appropriate list when you
need help. You might like to review both bugzilla.redhat.com and
bugzilla.rpmfusion.org searching for music related packages, that you
might be able to help review ...
DaveT (now I've got GUI on an F12 rc install, I might have a chance at
getting audacity to build and work out what's going wrong) ;-0
5270
days inactive
5291
days old
9 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Development discussions related to Fedora -
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano -
Orcan Ogetbil -
Simon Lewis