Discussion about problems, successions, ...
Back to Forum List
>>
Back to Topic List
>>
VIEW ALL POSTS
Changing direction of PulsarOS
Posted Tuesday, 03 November 2009 By 63
Modified: Wednesday, 04 November 2009
Hi Community,
a big change is going to happen. PulsarOS switches from Opensolaris to Linux. Here are the main points, why I'm doing this:
.) Opensolaris is a dependency hell. You can't create a proper core system, without getting serious trouble.
.) Opensolaris isn't full open source. (There are still some binaries, drivers and libraries that are closed source)
.) Lack of drivers.
.) No powermanagement features for embedded boards (like VIA).
PulsarOS should be a distribution for home servers, but I can't achieve this goal with Opensolaris (see the points above). Right now I'm working on a embedded linux version with the filesystem BTRFS.
BTRFS is powerful and could be the "next" filesystem. Linux is able to run on many platforms and will reach much more users as Opensolaris is doing it now (maybe there will be a change).
Stay tuned and tell me your opinion.
Cheers Thomas
|
PulsarOS' new direction... some questions
Posted Friday, 20 November 2009 By Craig Olofson
Hi Thomas;
I'm just checking in. We currently use FreeNAS .7 but, since they're moving from FreeBSD to Linux, I'm surveying what's out there again. A few questions -apologies if they're bad, this isn't my line of work:
- Which distribution of Linux will you be using?
- Will PulsarOS' Linux be using the distributions repositories?
- BTRFS seems to be pre-production quality. Is that how you see it?
- PulsarOS is being described as "modular." Can you give me an example or comparison with existing schema such as... rolling a deb install?
Interesting project & good-looking site. Thanks!
-Craig
|
Hi Graig
Posted Friday, 20 November 2009 By 63
There are no bad questions - just bad answers ;-)
PulsarOS is based on the Buildroot framework, so it is an own distribution. Thus, PulsarOS doesn't use the distribution repositories like Ubuntu, Fedora or Suse. I am going to create an own update mechanism in conclusion with an existing package manager like Pacman or Ipkg.
BTRFS is quite stable right now, but I had no time for stress testing. I will do that after I've finished the administration interface. That's one of the reasons why PulsarOS is in "Alpha" stage.
Modular means that the base system just consists of the core linux system and the administration interface. This includes:
- CIFS Server
- NFS Server
- AFP Server (need to check that)
With the base system you have the possibility to create a small NAS box. The plugin system I'm working at, allows you to add additional software (like Squeezecenter, mail server, web server, Bittorrent, sync server,....) with just a few clicks. This is also connected with the package manager.
Right now I'm in the design phase of all this stuff, but documentation and development guidelines for the plugins are coming soon.
Thx for the compliments
|
New package manager? - mmnnn maybe a bad idea.
Posted Monday, 08 February 2010 By Ezequiel Brizuela [aka QliX=D!]
I Think that the best you can do is to keep with the Linux Standart Base (LSB -
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/lsb) and keep the RPM package management. I'm not a RH or Suse or ANY-RPM distro lover, but stand with LSB means compatibility and interoperability with other distros. And, as i always say: "Please, don't reinvent the wheel!!".
We can stand with this Package manager, and focus the effords in other areas of the system.
Even, we can use a repository of metapackages that points to the real packages to install with some little changes, and get a full benefits of low maintanable repos, and use the basic standart packages of another distro (like centos, fedora, or maybe deb repos like ubuntu, debian, etc), that is currently got high efforts of a lot of people that maintain them.
My 2 Cents.
QliX=D!
|
As we discussed through email
Posted Thursday, 25 February 2010 By 63
I know that existing package repositories will be easier to adapt as to start a completely new plugin system, but PulsarOS is not going this way.
I'm going to use a package manager like pacman, ipkg or even rpm but not with standard packages from fedora or suse.
The plugins should fit in the architecture of PulsarOS. (light, fit into ram, easy to configure,....) I hope you see what I mean after the first release.
Cheers
Thomas
|
