ltsp root directory

[Patrice Dumas]

Hello,

The linux terminal project needs a directory for the filesystems
exported to the terminals. Upstream uses /opt/ltsp. Upstream asked the
lsb/fhs, but nobody answered something definitive, and nobody said that
/opt/ltsp was wrong when upstream proposed it.

In fedora, I think that /opt/ltsp is not very good. I asked on devel 
list and people objected to /opt/ltsp, proposing /var/lib/ltsp and 
/srv/ltsp. (as a side note, it is in fact along /opt/ltsp5/i386 and 
so on and so forth but it isn't of major interest, the issue is about 
the directory the ltsp directory should be in).


What is your recommentdation?
/opt
/var/lib
/srv
Something else?

--
Pat

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 12:01 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  The linux terminal project needs a directory for the filesystems
>  exported to the terminals. Upstream uses /opt/ltsp. Upstream asked the
>  lsb/fhs, but nobody answered something definitive, and nobody said that
>  /opt/ltsp was wrong when upstream proposed it.
>  
>  In fedora, I think that /opt/ltsp is not very good. 
/opt/ltsp is absurd (for upstream, for a vendor and for a distro)

>   I asked on devel 
>  list and people objected to /opt/ltsp, proposing /var/lib/ltsp and 
>  /srv/ltsp. (as a side note, it is in fact along /opt/ltsp5/i386 and 
>  so on and so forth but it isn't of major interest, the issue is about 
>  the directory the ltsp directory should be in).
>  
>  
>  What is your recommentdation?
>  /opt
>  /var/lib
>  /srv 
Depends on what */ltsp is supposed to take. Could you elaborate?

So far, of these alternative only /var/lib/ltsp would resemble to
something potentially making sense.

Ralf

[Dan Young]

On 10/28/07, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 12:01 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>  > What is your recommentdation?
>  > /opt
>  > /var/lib
>  > /srv
>
>  Depends on what */ltsp is supposed to take. Could you elaborate?
>
>  So far, of these alternative only /var/lib/ltsp would resemble to
>  something potentially making sense. 
Mostly NFS mounted root FS for terminals; possibly NBD swapfiles too.

-- 
Dan Young <dyoung(a)mesd.k12.or.us&gt;
Multnomah ESD - Technology Services
503-257-1562

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 09:46 -0700, Dan Young wrote:
>  On 10/28/07, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  > On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 12:01 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>  > > What is your recommentdation?
>  > > /opt
>  > > /var/lib
>  > > /srv
>  >
>  > Depends on what */ltsp is supposed to take. Could you elaborate?
>  >
>  > So far, of these alternative only /var/lib/ltsp would resemble to
>  > something potentially making sense.
>  
>  Mostly NFS mounted root FS for terminals; 
Hmm, I don't fully understand (I have
no clues about ltsp), so let me
ask for details:

* Are these mount-points or root-filesystems to be mounted (== constant
data)?
* Is this data which customizable (== configurable)?
* Is this data which is automatically generated or constant data to be
shipped as part of rpms.
* Is this automatically regenerated?
* Is this data machine dependent?

Depending on the answers to these questions even a directory
below /etc/ltsp or /usr/share/ltsp or %{_libdir)/ltsp could make sense.

>   possibly NBD swapfiles too. 
Dunno what NBD is, but this sounds
like volatile data.

Then /var/lib/ltsp (or subdirs thereof) most likely looks like at least
a suitable candidate to getting started.

Ralf

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 06:07:31PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > 
>  > Mostly NFS mounted root FS for terminals;
>  Hmm, I don't fully understand (I have no clues about ltsp), so let me
>  ask for details:
>  
>  * Are these mount-points or root-filesystems to be mounted (== constant
>  data)? 
Yes they are constant from the client point of view. But they may be
modified on the server.

>  * Is this data which customizable (== configurable)? 
This is a complete filesystem, in this filesystem there is a full FHS
tree.

>  * Is this data which is automatically generated or constant data to
> be
>  shipped as part of rpms. 
It is generated. Plan is more or less to install rpms in the direrctory
like a chroot.

>  * Is this automatically regenerated? 
The plan is to install it as a rpm chroot, but it will also be
configurated, with a file in the *ltsp5/i386/etc/ltsp.conf or the like
holding information for all the hosts using this root filesystem.

>  * Is this data machine dependent? 
It is an arch dependent chroot (depending on the terminal hardware), 
so there will be 
*/ltsp5/i386
*/ltsp5/ppc
....

>  Depending on the answers to these questions even a directory
>  below /etc/ltsp or /usr/share/ltsp or %{_libdir)/ltsp could make sense. 
It is a full filesystem with its own /etc, /usr/share and so on and so
forth. It is more similar with mock chroots in my opinion. With the
difference that these chroots are to be NFS exported.

>  >  possibly NBD swapfiles too.
>  Dunno what NBD is, but this sounds like volatile data. 
It may hold the swap partition of the terminal, nbd is the protocol
used to transparently use it from the terminal, although it is on
another host (NBD is Network Block Device).

--
Pat

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 01:17:25PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > What is your recommentdation?
>  > /opt
>  > /var/lib
>  > /srv
>  
>  Depends on what */ltsp is supposed to take. Could you elaborate? 
ltsp5/i386 would hold a complete filesystem exported through nfs to 
the terminal clients. This filesystem is used as the filesystem for the 
clients. The idea is to have a fedora install in this filesystem (with
a package that allows to create writable files in a rw filesystem and
maybe other goodies). (but it could also be an ubuntu fillesystem 
too ;-).

>  So far, of these alternative only /var/lib/ltsp would resemble to
>  something potentially making sense. 
--
Pat

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 17:52 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>  On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 01:17:25PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > > What is your recommentdation?
>  > > /opt
>  > > /var/lib
>  > > /srv
>  > 
>  > Depends on what */ltsp is supposed to take. Could you elaborate?
>  
>  ltsp5/i386 would hold a complete filesystem exported through nfs to 
>  the terminal clients. 
Are you familiar with /net and autofs (/etc/auto.net)?

>   This filesystem is used as the filesystem for the 
>  clients. The idea is to have a fedora install in this filesystem (with
>  a package that allows to create writable files in a rw filesystem and
>  maybe other goodies). (but it could also be an ubuntu fillesystem 
>  too ;-). 
OK, our mails crossed, this answers most of my questions.

My current vote goes for /var/lib/ltsp. This would allow all ltsp*
packages to treat this directory and sub-dirs thereof as their "private
play ground".

Ralf

[Toshio Kuratomi]

Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 17:52 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> >  This filesystem is used as the filesystem for the 
> > clients. The idea is to have a fedora install in this filesystem (with
> > a package that allows to create writable files in a rw filesystem and
> > maybe other goodies). (but it could also be an ubuntu fillesystem 
> > too ;-).
>  OK, our mails crossed, this answers most of my questions.
>  
>  My current vote goes for /var/lib/ltsp. This would allow all ltsp*
>  packages to treat this directory and sub-dirs thereof as their "private
>  play ground".
>   
+1.

-Toshio

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:01:12PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>  Hello,
>   
The consensus is going to /var/lib.

To clarify, the packages don't put anything in that directory (except
maybe subdirectories), but this is used as the default for the ltsp
root. If somebody don't want, he just has to modify /etc/ltsp5/ltsp.conf
and set the variable to another value. It is used by scripts afterwards,
to put stuff in it.

--
Pat