On Wednesday 30 April 2008 01:13:27 am Matej Cepl wrote:

> The whole truth is that we are on the way towards Stateless Linux
> (which means here xorg.conf-less X), but we are not there yet. To
> be honest, the way is long and the question is whether we will
> arrive at Fedora 10 or later.
> ...

Are we really? Upon what do you base that statement? I'd be very
interested in knowing more, because the Stateless Linux mailing list
looks rather inactive. Is there a roadmap? And what's the current
status?

I'd also interested in contributing if I could, because I've found
portions of it to be extremely useful. I daresay critical for
certain next-generation embedded Linux platforms. It would be great
if progress could be made by Fedora 10, and it would be a real shame
if that opportunity were lost. Especially since Microsoft is picking
up steam in this embedded space, from what I've seen.

-dwight-

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 19:29 -0800, dwight at supercomputer.org wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 April 2008 01:13:27 am Matej Cepl wrote:
>
> > The whole truth is that we are on the way towards Stateless Linux
> > (which means here xorg.conf-less X), but we are not there yet. To
> > be honest, the way is long and the question is whether we will
> > arrive at Fedora 10 or later.
> > ...
>
> Are we really? Upon what do you base that statement? I'd be very
> interested in knowing more, because the Stateless Linux mailing list
> looks rather inactive. Is there a roadmap? And what's the current
> status?

We're on our way to the Online Desktop, in which the operating system
itself starts to barely matter at all. (Which should draw people to
Linux since its cheap and reliable, right?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

2008/5/1 Callum Lerwick <seg@haxxed.com>:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 19:29 -0800, dwight at supercomputer.org wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 April 2008 01:13:27 am Matej Cepl wrote:
> >
> > > The whole truth is that we are on the way towards Stateless Linux
> > > (which means here xorg.conf-less X), but we are not there yet. To
> > > be honest, the way is long and the question is whether we will
> > > arrive at Fedora 10 or later.
> > > ...
> >
> > Are we really? Upon what do you base that statement? I'd be very
> > interested in knowing more, because the Stateless Linux mailing list
> > looks rather inactive. Is there a roadmap? And what's the current
> > status?
>
> We're on our way to the Online Desktop, in which the operating system
> itself starts to barely matter at all. (Which should draw people to
> Linux since its cheap and reliable, right?

Do not believe that this is true at all. But ok. All that will mean is
that every one will be using Windows Live, and there will be even less
of a market for Linux... I guess that's all off-topic however.

--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wednesday 30 April 2008 10:28:52 pm Callum Lerwick wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 19:29 -0800, dwight at supercomputer.org
wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 April 2008 01:13:27 am Matej Cepl wrote:
> > > The whole truth is that we are on the way towards Stateless
> > > Linux (which means here xorg.conf-less X), but we are not
> > > there yet. To be honest, the way is long and the question is
> > > whether we will arrive at Fedora 10 or later.
> > > ...
> >
> > Are we really? Upon what do you base that statement? I'd be very
> > interested in knowing more, because the Stateless Linux mailing
> > list looks rather inactive. Is there a roadmap? And what's the
> > current status?
>
> We're on our way to the Online Desktop, in which the operating
> system itself starts to barely matter at all. (Which should draw
> people to Linux since its cheap and reliable, right?

I don't believe it, but your reply doesn't answer my question.
Where's the roadmap, and what's the plan for getting there? And
who's in charge, and who's involved?

-dwight-

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 00:22 +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> Adam Jackson wrote:
> > Ideally, though this doesn't work yet, you'd just do:
> >
> > Section "Device"
> > Driver "vesa"
> > EndSection
>
> It doesn't? This is what my xorg.conf looks like:
>
> Section "Device"
> Driver "nouveau"
> Identifier "Videocard0"
> EndSection
>
> That works fine for me.

Nice! I still don't like the magic Videocard0 there, that should get
filled in for you. But that's better than I thought.

- ajax

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 04:56 -0800, dwight at supercomputer.org wrote:
> I don't believe it, but your reply doesn't answer my question.
> Where's the roadmap, and what's the plan for getting there? And
> who's in charge, and who's involved?

Who's involved? Google is currently leading the way, especially in the
"back end":

http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/var_0.html

GNOME is working on a front end:

http://live.gnome.org/OnlineDesktop

And Red Hat is integrating it all:

http://mugshot.org/

If you're expecting roadmaps and plans, you're going to be disappointed.
This is new territory, just being discovered. Who's in charge? Whoever
gets there first.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 09:53:43 -0400,
Adam Jackson <ajackson@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> There's a detail here for outputs, which is that we don't always do
> sensible things if we try to start X with no monitor attached, and for
> some KVMs it's tough to tell the difference between not attached and
> merely not active. That's just a bug though.

Or even when the code knows a monitor is attached, but it doesn't do EDID.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Thursday 01 May 2008 10:52:35 am Callum Lerwick wrote:
> http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/var_0.html
>
> GNOME is working on a front end:
>
> http://live.gnome.org/OnlineDesktop
>
> And Red Hat is integrating it all:
>
> http://mugshot.org/
>
> If you're expecting roadmaps and plans, you're going to be
> disappointed. This is new territory, just being discovered. Who's
> in charge? Whoever gets there first.

I think you're confusing Stateless Linux with Stateless Linux
Desktop. You might want to check out the Fedora Wiki regarding
Stateless Linux, and see what it's actually about. It covers
quite a bit more than just the Desktop.

Google and Gnome are notably absent from the project. Granted, the
Wiki might be out of date, as the Fedora Stateless Linux project
seems to be rather dead, with no mail even being generated on its
mailing list of late.

The key point of interest to me is that that there are a number of
issues which remain in Fedora's current Stateless Linux
implementation even before you get to the Desktop, or any other apps
which are built on top of the Stateless Linux functionality.

Personally, I could care less about the Desktop or Google Apps in
this particular regard. I'm more interested in getting the basic
O.S. issues solved.

If you do it right, you can kill several important birds with one
stone. But it's not there yet.

It also strikes me as being relatively straightforward towards
ironing out these issues (and yes, I'll volunteer to do some of the
work). But I'm not going to spend time on it if someone else is
doing it. Or if my interpretation of what needs to be done isn't in
sync with the general project.

Nor if Stateless Linux (not Stateless Desktop) is dead, and has no
future.

-dwight-






--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 2008-05-01, 03:29 GMT, dwight at supercomputer.org wrote:
> Are we really? Upon what do you base that statement? I'd be
> very interested in knowing more, because the Stateless Linux
> mailing list looks rather inactive. Is there a roadmap? And
> what's the current status?

I used “Stateless Linux� in very open meaning of the word. AFAIK
it is now more state of mind, than a real project.

Matěj

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 2008-05-02, 03:12 GMT, dwight at supercomputer.org wrote:
> I think you're confusing Stateless Linux with Stateless Linux
> Desktop.

You are confusing Stateless Linux and Online Desktop.

Matěj

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list