World: r3wp
[Syllable] The free desktop and server operating system family
older newer | first last |
Maxim 13-Dec-2009 [1905x2] | would be nice to try to get the latest mesa project running on it with the gallium driver model. that would get you HW accelerated gfx without the need for your own HW drivers. |
(once I have a bit more C/C++ under my belt, I might see if that's at all possible). | |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1907] | Yup |
Maxim 13-Dec-2009 [1908] | is syllable GPL or MIT/BSD ? |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1909x2] | If you could settle for an FTP server you could try Desktop, but you can't trust your files to be safe |
LGPL, mainly, so you can run closed software on it | |
Maxim 13-Dec-2009 [1911] | ok. LGPL is a "fair" license. if you edit others work, you help them back, but your not *forced* to have them leverage your work for free |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1912] | Yup |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1913] | Depending on linking issues, of course. Fortunately the R3 host kit seems to be compatible with that linking model :) |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1914] | That will depend on the still-to-be-revealed two licenses |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1915] | I mean architecturally compatible: Dynamic linking with a clean integration interface. |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1916] | Yes |
Pekr 13-Dec-2009 [1917] | I think that many ppl will be disappointed by licences. There's some hint already in Host related wiki document ... imo the licence will prevent R3 Clone DLL to work with host .... but I would be glad if it would not be so ... |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1918x2] | Though that would be bad on principle, in practice we don't want to encourage cloning - it could lead to dividing the community. It's better to cooperate than to compete in this case. The main license restriction that would hurt us is anything that would prevent us from cloning the host code, since that is basically what every host code port is. |
Clones are good if they don't fork the development effort. As long as clone code can be reintegrated into the original, cool. | |
Maxim 13-Dec-2009 [1920x2] | the point of the host is not to start your own rebol, but to allow rebol to work in your stuff. that, I think, should be emphasized within the documentation/web site when it will all be official and "a product". |
going OT we are in syllable group, and I think now is not the time for a license debate. | |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1922x2] | To the contrary, it's extremely important to Syllable |
The project almost exploded over it two years ago, and I've been in dire straits since | |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1924] | Wasn't Syllable derived from Atheos, which was GPL iirc? How did yo manage to switch to LGPL? |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1925x2] | We didn't switch; it was always like this |
When you say "LGPL", it will echo "GPL" in the heads of free software zealots and "evil" in the heads of anti free software zealots | |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1927] | I guess I didn't recall correctly. I remrmber that the original developer of Atheos used the GPL to prevent anyone from making commercial clones of his operating system, then abandoned it. Syllable was the result of that. I guess I remember wrong. |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1928] | What he said was that he would abandon it in favour of BSD if the GPL zealots kept nagging him |
Maxim 13-Dec-2009 [1929] | ok, but part of the point for me is that the license isn't yet finalized and a direct discussion between you and Carl, is going to be much more effective at making the host suitable to your needs than us assuming and argumenting about it. Contrary to what many might think, Carl is quite open to suggestions. When the case and reasoning for it is founded and logical, he has rarely been, if ever, at odds with anything I've suggested. |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1930] | Syllable was the result of him simply disappearing |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1931] | So he relicensed as LGPL? Good for him :) |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1932] | NO: it was always like this |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1933x2] | That is what I meant by "abandoned". |
Him disappearing. | |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1935] | There was NO LICENSE ABANDONMENT |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1936] | No, project abandonment. |
Graham 13-Dec-2009 [1937] | Does syllable run on ARM v5 instruction set? |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1938] | The Syllable libraries are LGPL, so that it is a platform for all software. This includes GNU's C library |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1939] | Ah, the libraries. That fits then. |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1940x3] | The applications are GPL, because noone needs to build on them, anyway |
When Ohloh analysed our code, it turned out we're predominantly LGPL. (While Haiku, which chose to be MIT, is predominantly GPL in practice) | |
And no, there is only Syllable for 32 bit Intel | |
Graham 13-Dec-2009 [1943] | what's the smallest server footprint in mb? |
BrianH 13-Dec-2009 [1944] | Well, the R3 host code license needs to allow LGPL licensed hosts - that is what I was talking about earlier. If there are restrictions in the host code license that would prevent that, it would be a problem for platforms like Syllable with LGPL libraries. |
Graham 13-Dec-2009 [1945] | ( shame ..all these plug computers which are being used as stealth servers are using ARM processors ) |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1946] | If you're talking about Syllable Server, that is 370 MB installed for the 0.3 version. It is currently growing, but I also did a test build for a stripped cloud server that was around 250 MB |
Graham 13-Dec-2009 [1947x2] | And ram requirements? |
How well does it treat NAND ? | |
Kaj 13-Dec-2009 [1949x4] | Depends greatly on where you load it and what you run |
On a 192 MB machine, it starts up using 13 MB. On a 768 MB machine, it uses 21 MB for itself | |
I'm running a number of websites on Cheyenne fairly comfortably within 64 MB | |
What's the context for NAND? | |
Graham 13-Dec-2009 [1953x2] | Does it need to write to disk frequently? |
I think I read somewhere that some of these linuces are optimized to reduce disk writes ... | |
older newer | first last |