[02:10] <sbalneav> evening all
[05:02] <foxbuntu> Hey all, working with an older laptop trying to install edubuntu, however i get "Authentication Falures" wth the LiveCD on the laptop but using the same disk for a VM it boots fine
[05:02] <foxbuntu> ...the auto login is not working and dropping to a terminal revealed the errors
[06:48] <Classic> i get this error when ever i try installing mysql
[06:48] <Classic> errors were encountered while processing: fuse-utils, gvfs-fuse
[06:48] <Classic> how do i fix this? i'm going crazy ;-; i've been trying to fix this for over 7 hours
[12:50] <alkisg> !info usermode
[14:50] <sbalneav> Morning all
[15:36] <kuya_> i have a problem setting up ltsp
[15:37] <alkisg> !ask
[15:44] <kuya_> i'm following this book by osborne - ubuntu server administration where instead of using the default base directory "/opt/ltsp/i386" the book uses "/var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386"
[15:45] <kuya_> problem is when i do ltsp-update-image i get this error: chroot /opt/ltsp/i386 doesn't exist
[15:45] <kuya_> sorry i'm new to linux but i wanted to do this too.
[15:46] <sbalneav> Book's wrong.
[15:46] <sbalneav> All you should (normally) have to do is:
[15:47] <sbalneav> ltsp-build-client
[15:47] <sbalneav> ltsp-update-sshkeys
[15:47] <sbalneav> ltsp-update-image
[15:47] <sbalneav> ltsp-update-kernels
[15:47] <sbalneav> You should be bootable at that point.
[15:51] <kuya_> well that's what is normally done. but what i think the book is trying to do is to associate the client with a TFTP server. or is the book wrong too in doing so?
[15:52] <sbalneav> Without seeing the book, I can't say.
[15:53] <sbalneav> but that's not the way it's normally done.
[15:53] <jbicha> doesn't that work automagically in Ubuntu these days?
[15:53] <sbalneav> yup
[15:54] <jbicha> I was surprised by how easy it was to get LTSP working for me (....except for that one upside-down screen issue but that's NVIDIA's fault)
[15:54] <kuya_> what did you do?
[15:58] <alkisg> kuya_: maybe you misunderstood what the book says (I haven't seen the book, I'm just guessing). /var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386 is the tftp directory, while /opt/ltsp/i386 is the "virtual client disk" directory. So both of those paths are used.
[15:58] <jbicha> I just installed ltsp-server-standalone , then ran ltsp-build-client
[16:02] <jbicha> and then I had to change all the 192.168.0 in /etc/ltsp/dhcpd.conf to 192.168.1 to match my actual network
[16:03] <kuya_> setting up the DCHP configuration file: From the book >>> "The directives that follow actually point the PXE network boot systems to the appropriate files and directories. The default is associated with the --base directory configured with the ltsp-build-client command. option root-path "/opt/ltsp/i386"; But for the client configuration associated with a TFTP server, you’ll need to change the path to option root-path "/var/lib/
[16:06] <kuya_> then create an NFS share pointing to "/var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386"
[16:07] <alkisg> Urm yeah that doesn't sound right for any distro I know... :-/
[16:07] <sbalneav> that's just plain wrong.
[16:08] <sbalneav> kuya_: http://wiki.ltsp.org/twiki/bin/view/Ltsp/LtspDocumentationUpstream
[16:08] <sbalneav> That's the docs I work on.
[16:08] <kuya_> then sudo ltsp-build-client  - -base  /var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp
[16:08] <sbalneav> I'm upstream for LTSP.
[16:08] <sbalneav> yeah, just ignore the book.
[16:08] <sbalneav> rip that chapter out :)
[16:08] <kuya_> haha
[16:08] <kuya_> ok
[16:09] <sbalneav> Did you buy it for the ltsp part?
[16:09] <kuya_> what do you mean?
[16:09] <kuya_> there's just one thing i'm curios about
[16:09] <sbalneav> Did you buy the book because of the ltsp chapter?
[16:09] <kuya_> no
[16:09] <sbalneav> Good
[16:09] <kuya_> i'm following the book to learn linux
[16:10] <sbalneav> OK, that's great.
[16:10] <jbicha> kuya_: yeah, it seems like your book isn't as helpful, I used the link sbalneav gave you and it was pretty helpful, see also the quickinstall guide & other stuff on https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuLTSP
[16:10] <kuya_> i got bored so i jumped straight to that chapter
[16:10] <sbalneav> Welcome to the circus! :)
[16:10] <kuya_> anyway theres something i'm just curious about
[16:10] <jbicha> books are good though, there's a lot to learn in Linux :-)
[16:11] <sbalneav> kuya_: Ask away.
[16:11] <kuya_> wait i'm thinking how to ask it
[16:11] <kuya_> hehe
[16:12] <kuya_> is the location /opt/ltsp/i386 hardcoded when i use the command ltsp-update-image?
[16:12] <sbalneav> it's the default, yeah
[16:12] <kuya_> how do i change it?
[16:12] <sbalneav> Why would you?
[16:13] <kuya_> because i want to
[16:13] <sbalneav> 99.99% of all people running LTSP run it from there.
[16:13] <kuya_> :-)
[16:13] <kuya_> isn't that what linux is about?
[16:13] <sbalneav> It's the "standard" place where ltsp lives.
[16:13] <sbalneav> Sure.
[16:13] <kuya_> well is it hard to change?
[16:13] <sbalneav> then you have to specify --base every time you run any of the ltsp maintenance commands.
[16:14] <kuya_> oh
[16:14] <sbalneav> ltsp-build-client --base
[16:14] <kuya_> ok i get it now
[16:14] <kuya_> thanks
[16:14] <sbalneav> ltsp-update-sshkeys --base
[16:14] <sbalneav> so unless you want a lot of extra typing :)
[16:14] <kuya_> well i might need this little bit of knowledge some day
[16:16] <sbalneav> Unless you're doing something very special, and know exactly why you're doing it, you're best to go with defaults.  If you're still learning linux, then that day won't be for a while :)
[16:16] <kuya_> yes sensei
[16:16] <kuya_> but like i said... i got bored
[16:17] <kuya_> thanks
[16:17] <kuya_> i'll be back soon
[16:18] <sbalneav> NP
[16:18] <sbalneav> we'll be here :)
[16:19] <kuya_> aight... that's good to know.
[17:17] <Ahmuck-Sr> Last, but certainly not least, the release of Ubuntu is creeping even more in the "commercial" direction, with the addition of things like Ubuntu One, the Software Soure (or whatever it is called), and the likes. If you are a Linux/FOSS "purist", you really need to think very carefully before installing Ubuntu, and look at some of those things. - http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10014347o-2000498448b,00.htm
[17:18] <Ahmuck-Sr> i'd wondered if this is why support for edubuntu/ltsp had been dropped and ubuntu was promoting thier own version of server/client/puppet thingy ealier this year
[17:19] <ogra> what makes your think support for ltsp has been dropped ?
[17:20] <sbalneav> ubuntu has their "own" thin client puppet thingy?
[17:20] <sbalneav> buh?
[17:21] <jbicha> ooh, my Moodle fix for Hardy & Jaunty is in the proposed repository, please test and leave feedback at https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/378726
[17:22] <sbalneav> \o/
[17:23] <sbalneav> http://git.gnome.org/cgit/sabayon/commit/?id=0b2ad90e6e1df25595ddbfca6fb51a8c90650036
[17:23] <sbalneav> We'll have sabayon group apply by lucid!  Kaloo kalay oh frabjous day!
[17:23] <jbicha> Ahmuck-Sr: I don't think the Software Store is evil...and the Ubuntu One client is open-source
[17:25] <sbalneav> Yeah, I don't think Ubuntu One's any more inherently evil than say gmail.
[17:25] <Ahmuck-Sr> ogra, as i understand it, conical pulled devs completely from the edubuntu project
[17:25] <Ahmuck-Sr> sbalneav: i dont' use gmail :)
[17:25] <sbalneav> there was only one "full time" dev for ubuntu
[17:25] <sbalneav> ogra :)
[17:26] <ogra> Ahmuck-Sr, what makes you think canonical dropped support for LTSP ?
[17:26] <ogra> did you read that anywhere or is it jusr speculation ?
[17:26] <ogra> *just
[17:26] <Ahmuck-Sr> iirc, conical was offereing a type of server/client after they pulled resources
[17:26] <ogra> Ahmuck-Sr, and as scott said, there was only one dev ever
[17:26] <Ahmuck-Sr> iirc, it was mentioned here by some of the members.  i'd have to search logs
[17:26] <sbalneav> Ahmuck-Sr: So, don't use Ubuntu One :)
[17:27] <Ahmuck-Sr> sbalneav: it's not about ubuntu one actually
[17:27] <sbalneav> AFAIK, there's NO other thin client solution offered by canonical.
[17:27] <ogra> software store is just a polished version of add/remove
[17:27] <ogra> and is supposed to replace all packaging gui tools over time
[17:28] <ogra> there is definately no other thin client solution pffered by canonical
[17:28] <ogra> and LTSP is still on the default CD installation
[17:28] <ogra> *offered
[17:28] <Ahmuck-Sr> sbalneav: i'm looking for the name
[17:29] <sbalneav> I don't see any problem with giving people the option of buying software for GNU/Linux.  "Purists" can just not buy anything, and others now have the option of buying an app if they can't find a free one to suit their needs.
[17:29] <ogra> yeah
[17:29] <ogra> though software store is a completely new approach to handle package management
[17:30] <ogra> and will replace synaptic, gdebi and all the fragmented pieces of gui tools over time
[17:30] <Ahmuck-Sr> i think the concern of some (quoted article aside) is that Linux, GNU, and GPL may soon be so tied up in commercial interests and commercial software that soon an individual won't be able to simply download anything without a paid fee tied to it, similar to mp3 and gif
[17:31] <ogra> nonsense
[17:31] <sbalneav> The GPL prevents this from happening.
[17:31] <sbalneav> If you license something with the GPL, it's free.
[17:31] <ogra> Linux, GNU, and GPL was always produced in a manner that you could build commercial services around itr
[17:31] <sbalneav> Exactly.  That was the intent of the GPL.
[17:32] <jbicha> and the Software Store is completely open source...Fedora or whoever could tweak it and release it with there next version
[17:32] <sbalneav> To keep the code free, but allow people to make money using the code.
[17:32] <sbalneav> Sure.
[17:32] <ogra> and i bet many people would be happy if they could just install skype with a single click
[17:32] <sbalneav> Making money with free software is a GOOD thing
[17:32] <sbalneav> for ALL of us.
[17:33] <Ahmuck-Sr> landscape
[17:33] <sbalneav> Landscape's a management tool, like the red hat thing.
[17:34] <sbalneav> manage all your pool of servers, updates, etc.  As I understand it.
[17:34] <ogra> right
[17:34] <ogra> its a service you can buy if you like ... totally optional
[17:34] <sbalneav> http://www.canonical.com/projects/landscape
[17:35] <sbalneav> right, instead of ssh-ing in to 55 machines and running apt-get update && apt-get upgrade, you can do it all from one "web based control panel"
[17:35] <Ahmuck-Sr> With good machines, (TARP money) one no longer needs ltsp, rather landscape.
[17:35] <Ahmuck-Sr> Software as a service
[17:35] <sbalneav> Buh?
[17:35] <ogra> ???
[17:36] <Ahmuck-Sr> perhaps i need to compare differences between the tow
[17:36] <Ahmuck-Sr> tow/two
[17:36] <sbalneav> I think so.
[17:36] <ogra> yes, there is no relation at all
[17:36] <Ahmuck-Sr> i find ltsp clunky
[17:36] <Ahmuck-Sr> landscape is very ... unclunky
[17:37] <sbalneav> Ahmuck-Sr: If you don't like ltsp, then don't use it :)
[17:37] <ogra> landscape does not offer any thin client technology
[17:37] <sbalneav> off for lunch
[17:37] <Ahmuck-Sr> the purpose of ltsp is central managment, correct?
[17:37] <ogra> i dont get why you compare a network management software with a thin client server
[17:38] <ogra> the purpose of ltsp is to run diskless thin clients
[17:38] <ogra> the purpose of landscape is management of huge networks
[17:39] <Ahmuck-Sr> and i would want to run diskless clients over a landscape client because?
[17:39] <ogra> ??
[17:39] <Ahmuck-Sr> is ltsp not scalable to huge networks?
[17:39] <ogra> landascape is a plain management service
[17:39] <ogra> it has *nothing* to do with thin clients
[17:40] <Ahmuck-Sr> is there a difference between a thin client and a managed client.  in the end they perform the same thing
[17:40] <Ahmuck-Sr> same duty
[17:40] <ogra> you can buy the landscape service at canonical ... you can then monitor and maintain all systems that have a landscape client installed in your network
[17:40] <ogra> no
[17:41] <ogra> landscape doesnt manage netbooting of diskless clients, doesnt manage that they connect to a central server etc
[17:41] <ogra> landscape is for remote package and user management as well as monitoring
[17:41] <Ahmuck-Sr> perhaps i asked the wrong question, the end result is the same?
[17:41] <ogra> no
[17:41] <ogra> its like comparing a car and a helicopter ...
[17:41] <ogra> nothing incommon
[17:41] <jbicha> LTSP is a real good option for libraries, schools, computer labs where you can save money by using minimal computer hardware
[17:42] <ogra> they are competely distinct things for completely different purposes
[17:42] <ogra> with no overlaps anywhere
[17:42] <jbicha> launchpad is for a large company who wants a tool to make sure all of the computers have a baseline of installed software with all of their updates, etc.
[17:42] <ogra> you can use landscape to maintain an LTSP server though
[17:42] <Ahmuck-Sr> putting aside money as a limitation ...
[17:43] <jbicha> Ahmuck-Sr: stop thinking outside of the box! :-)
[17:43] <ogra> you could compare landscape and webmin or landscape and ebox or landscape and whatever redhat calls their commercial service of the same kind
[17:43] <ogra> but you definately cant compare ltsp and landscape
[17:45] <Ahmuck-Sr> with grant funding drying up, community based resources are getting harder to fund.  one then looks at management, and wonders if it's easier to use ltsp or use a landscape type of based service.  those considerations come down to performance, ease of use (time), etc.
[17:46] <Ahmuck-Sr> if the end result is the same, most often people will pick the easier road.
[17:49] <ogra> again
[17:49] <ogra> landscape != ltsp
[17:49] <ogra> they have nothing in common
[17:50] <ogra> you wont be able to run or manage thin clients with landscape
[17:52] <jbicha> and ltsp is not about remote management
[17:53] <ogra> right
[17:54] <Ahmuck-Sr> fwiw, i have seen the one thingy, and agreed it was a better way to install software.
[17:55] <ogra> which "one thingy"
[17:55]  * alkisg loves the Karmic `add-apt-repository` command :)
[18:00] <Ahmuck-Sr> btw, were testing karmic upgrade today on the thin clients
[18:00] <Ahmuck-Sr> putting it through it's paces
[18:09] <highvoltage> good evening
[18:10] <ogra> highvoltage, congrats to the new job !
[18:10] <ogra> you should have gone to BTS
[18:10] <highvoltage> ogra: thanks!
[18:10] <highvoltage> ogra: I will as soon as my work visa is sorted out!
[18:10] <highvoltage> ogra: well, when it happens again anyway :)
[18:10] <ogra> so we'll see you next time then :)
[18:10] <highvoltage> ogra: yep!
[18:24] <sbalneav> Ahmuck-Sr: Landscape is a tool for managing the functioning of servers.
[18:25] <sbalneav> So, lets take a typical scenario.  You're a school, with a pile of old pentium 3 dells with 256 megs of memory, and maybe $5000 in the budget for the lab.
[18:25] <sbalneav> ltsp choice:
[18:25] <sbalneav> You yank the the hard drives from the old dells, and go out an buy youself 1 good server, with 2 dual core cpu's or one quad core.
[18:26] <sbalneav> you set the lab up as a series of thin clients.
[18:26] <sbalneav> landscape choice.
[18:27] <sbalneav> you keep the lab as it is, with no shared data/homedirs, and run a full ubuntu desktop on each box.
[18:27] <sbalneav> landscape just allows you do keep the packages up to date on all the desktops.
[18:27] <ogra> slow and clunky for sure
[18:28] <sbalneav> Or the third way
[18:29] <sbalneav> install LTSP and for the 3 labs you've got in the school, you buy 3 landscape licenses for the monitoring/update functioality it provides you :)
[18:29] <sbalneav> ltsp boots diskless thin clients
[18:29] <sbalneav> landscape allows you to do performance monitoring/package management.
[18:29] <sbalneav> they're two different tools.
[18:30] <ogra> but go together very well :)
[18:30] <ogra> side by side
[18:30] <sbalneav> sure
[18:31]  * ogra dances ... 
[18:31] <ogra> i found the perfect SSD for my lappie :)
[18:31] <sbalneav> Oh?
[18:31] <sbalneav> do tell
[18:32] <Ahmuck-Sr> one could set up landscape and then use ndb and ldap for central login/user directory?
[18:32] <ogra> 220MB/sec reading, 200MB/sec writing ... 128GB
[18:32] <ogra> Samsung SSD PB22-J
[18:32] <ogra> 299€
[18:32]  * ogra just ordered
[18:32] <sbalneav> PB*J?
[18:33] <sbalneav> You're putting a peanut butter and jelly sandwitch in your laptop? :)
[18:33] <ogra> lol
[18:33] <sbalneav> That'll muck up the dvd drive for sure.
[18:33] <sbalneav> Nice looking unit.
[18:35] <ogra> well, i wont see it
[18:35] <ogra> it will live inside its cage in my laptop ...
[18:36] <ogra> rattling the bars from time to time i guess :)
[18:36] <ogra> it will be incredible fast though
[18:36] <ogra> my 7200rpm HDD currently does 50MB/sec
[18:36] <ogra> at most
[18:37] <ogra> the SSDs start at 150MB/sec ... that one specifically goes up to 220MB/sec
[18:37] <sbalneav> I'm looking at this:
[18:37] <sbalneav> http://store.sansdigital-shop.com/cocscoflcfto.html
[18:38] <Ahmuck-Sr> does the upgrade overwrite the ltsp settings?
[18:42] <sbalneav> Your lts.conf?  Shouldn't
[18:43] <sbalneav> but with the upgrade, you should back up your lts.conf, /etc/ltsp directory, and build a new chroot.
[18:43] <sbalneav> Otherwise you're running a karmic server with a jaunty chroot.
[18:43] <ogra> CF to SATA ?
[18:44] <sbalneav> yeah
[18:44] <sbalneav> cool little dingus
[18:44]  * ogra only owns one CF card
[18:44] <Ahmuck-Sr> ah, i wonder if that's my problme
[18:44] <ogra> and thats not really impressing if it comes to performance :)
[18:44] <Ahmuck-Sr> the jaunty chroot
[18:44] <sbalneav> Possibly, yes.
[18:44] <Ahmuck-Sr> this is beyond the ltsp-build-client
[18:45] <Ahmuck-Sr> i'll look at it then
[18:45] <Ahmuck-Sr> i'm having problems with firefox/flash, locking up the firefox window
[18:45] <Ahmuck-Sr> sound is staying on though
[18:45] <Ahmuck-Sr> which is why i asked
[18:46] <sbalneav> Is flash what's doing the locking up?
[18:46] <sbalneav> i.e. if it's just normal web pages, it's fine?
[18:47] <Ahmuck-Sr> i'll test some more and see
[18:48] <sbalneav> Flash is getting more and more ill behaved, it seems.
[18:48] <Ahmuck-Sr> time for silverlight?
[18:49]  * Ahmuck-Sr grins onerously
[18:49] <ogra> well, silverlight is supposed to run on android ... wont be long until you see a native linux version after that i guess
[18:50] <sbalneav> Sure, if Microsoft produces a linux version of it.
[18:50] <Ahmuck-Sr> i think mono has something that works like that
[18:51] <ogra> sbalneav, android is linux ..
[18:51] <ogra> sbalneav, and they want the market share ;)
[18:51] <sbalneav> Both flash and silverlight are commercial pieces of software. If they don't work correctly, I highly recommend filing a bug in the bugtrackers of their respective authors companies.
[18:51] <ogra> yeah
[18:52] <Ahmuck-Sr> heh, that'd be interesting
[18:52] <mhall119|work> sbalneav: lol
[18:58] <Lns> +1 sbalneav
[18:59] <Lns> I'm so sick of flash being the main reason people complain about ltsp with ff not being a localapp
[18:59] <Lns> and shockwave not having a linux version..i had no idea how many schools use shockwave until i started doing ltsp
[19:02] <Ahmuck-Sr> Lns: does that tell you something about your clients?
[19:02] <Lns> Ahmuck: uhm... that they want to be able to do anything in linux as they can in windows?
[19:06] <highvoltage> ogra: that's crazy fast
[19:06] <sbalneav> I haven't had a chance to look at gnash lately.  Is it coming along?  If it's just flash VIDEOS people want (i.e. youtube) I keep recommending the greasemonkey script hqtube at userscripts.org, unfortunately, greasemonkey doesn't have support for shared scipts.
[19:07] <sbalneav> so you can't just drop something in, say, /usr/share/gm_scripts, and have it show up on everyone's firefox.
[19:08] <highvoltage> sbalneav: gnash can play youtube now, but even so it has some quirks, I guess for typical production use adobe flash is still the way to go
[19:09] <highvoltage> sbalneav: but it seems that by the time that a free flash player is finished, no one will care anymore since improvements in html5/svg/javascript/etc
[19:10] <sbalneav> Well, except for things like flash games, etc.
[19:11] <sbalneav> but I agree the video problem may go away.
[19:11] <sbalneav> Ahmuck-Sr: here's a test for you:
[19:11] <alkisg> I think it should be possible to make a seperate extension out of that HQtube plugin, one that won't even depend on greasemonkey... That way it would be available to all users
[19:12] <sbalneav> alkisg++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[19:12] <sbalneav> I just wish I knew about firefox extentions :(
[19:12] <sbalneav> I'd write one now
[19:12] <alkisg> I'll give that a go whenever I have time - but it *will* require a PPA for constant updates
[19:13] <Lns> You guys see this? http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/31/128236/Adobe-Pushing-For-Flash-and-PDF-In-Open-Government-Initiative?from=rss
[19:16] <sbalneav> PDF's ok
[19:16] <sbalneav> flash, eugh
[19:17] <alkisg> Flash would be fine if we had a decent player. E.g. if flash was open sourced, so that the community could build on it.
[19:18] <sbalneav> right.
[19:18] <sbalneav> problem is, it's a closed "standard"
[19:18] <alkisg> E.g. we're on flash version 10, and it doesn't yet support utf8!
[19:18] <alkisg> Nah, the swf standard is open. It's the tool that is closed...
[19:18] <alkisg> (afaik)
[19:19] <Lns> alkisg: then how come gnash is still having so many issues?
[19:19] <sbalneav> Really? The flash standard's PUBLISHED somewhere?
[19:19] <alkisg> I think so
[19:19]  * alkisg looks..
[19:19] <sbalneav> I'd be shocked and awed.
[19:20] <alkisg> http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/
[19:20] <alkisg> "The SWF file format is available as an open specification..."
[19:20] <Lns> i think there should be a law that any government standards should be open source. whether bsd, gpl, or whatever. we need that to progress and not feed the "proprietary" animals any more