Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

[roland]

> > Why?  I've never understood what a framebuffer gives you that you
> > don't have now.
> Just like the network auto-configuration via dhcp, it would allow users to 
> download images+kernel and run them like appliances without understanding 
> anything about X or UML, just click and run.

mhh, i also think framebuffer would be nice, but the main idea behind my 
posting is have some recent linux kernel up and running without any effort - 
with main focus on kernel, not on apps.

sure, it would be nice to have X for the unexperienced users, but if you run 
uml and get networking up and running, you just do ssh -X into your uml and 
then you have your X. those people who run the latest kernel for testing 
special things are not unexperienced, but having a packaged kernel+rootfs 
"ready to run" would also make _their_ life easier.  think of testing 
several kernels in parallel to find/fix regressions.

booting into something graphical with kdm/gdm login, firefox inside etc 
would be really nice, but that would be probably overkill for the purpose it 
should serve. framebuffer and X could be added later to uml, and i`m sure, 
it will exist one day.

btw - i think besides that packaged uml+rootfs, the same thing could be 
distributed in other formats, i.e. qemu, vmware, M$ virtual pc (add your 
favourite v12n solution here)

regards
roland



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Antoine Martin" <antoine@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Jeff Dike" <jdike@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Blaisorblade" <blaisorblade@xxxxxxxx>; <devzero@xxxxxx>; 
<user-mode-linux-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
<linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel 
release ?


> Jeff Dike wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:58:45PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote:
> > > I reckon that one critical thing which could drastically increase the 
> > > user base would be to have a working virtual framebuffer implementation.
> >
> > Why?  I've never understood what a framebuffer gives you that you
> > don't have now.
> Just like the network auto-configuration via dhcp, it would allow users to 
> download images+kernel and run them like appliances without understanding 
> anything about X or UML, just click and run.
> We are all capable of setting up Xvfb here, but most users are not, which 
> is why they download ready-made images.
> It would also make it a lot easier to focus on writing a management UI, 
> hell if there isn't one shortly after, I'll do one myself!
> Think of a UML browser image (running IE via wine in a limited image with 
> just X + wine + IE - I would much prefer that to having wine+IE installed 
> locally), testing framebuffer apps like gtk-fb/cairo-fb without risking 
> your dev environment, etc...
>
> Antoine 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/