On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 20:22 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > Craig White wrote: > > >>> I'd expect much better performance with the ltsp approach (running > >>> only X on the client with the desktop and apps on the faster machine) > >>> than you would have running the 2nd machine as a workstation with > >>> everything mounted via NFS. > >>> > >> I don't like the looks of K12LTSP. It seems to limit you to running FC5. > >> I'd like to set this up with F8 when it comes out. > >> > >> Oh well. It looks like it is not possible to do what I want to do. At > >> least not easily. > > ---- > > my objection to k12ltsp is that it is a turnkey setup. > > You object to something that works as installed? You can still break it > if you like, just like any other fedora or Centos install - and there is > no requirement to keep any of the canned/working configs. A lot of > people reconfigure to use a single nic and have set up load balancing > among servers. > > > ltsp rides on whatever you have installed. Fedora though would require > > using ltsp 4.2.x because ltsp 5.x is only ubuntu/debian at the moment > > There is a similar project called edubuntu that may eventually work out. > The people on the k12ltsp mailing list that are using both say that > edubuntu is still rough around the edges - as you might expect from the > comparative ages of the distributions. The beta F7 k12ltsp version > might be using ltsp 5.x (and that might be why it is not released > yet...). I think a lot people are using the one based on Centos 5.0 now. > > > The point of using ltsp is that it does all the heavy lifting for you > > and in essence would give you exactly what you want (diskless > > workstations) and the only difference is that you ***think*** you want > > to do it in your own prescribed way. LTSP sets it all up as an NFS > > server, thus you get the tftp bootup, then nfs mount the software (i.e. > > the file server). > > > > Easily of course, is always subjective > > K12ltsp is as easy as any fedora install, since the other packages just > come along for the ride. I'd recommend trying one under vmware (and you > can boot a virtual vmware thin client from it too) just to see the > configuration and setup scripts even if you don't end up using it. ---- actually, I'm sort of stuck doing almost that because I can't seem to get older iMac's to work as thin clients on ltsp 4.2 and one of the guys that helped with the Mac client utils says I need to look at what they employed on k12ltsp so I'm downloading the ltsp-6-32-bit disc images atm. I suspect that if I end up going all out, I will probably use the ltsp-5 with ubuntu though - I just don't know for sure. In talking with ltsp-5 developers on irc, "they haven't implemented the os goodness for RHEL/Fedora yet" Craig
