[Live-demo] Rethinking osgeo-live
maplabs at light42.com
Wed Oct 24 19:33:39 PDT 2012
this is breathtakingly unrealistic :-)
The trick to my mind is synergy and incremental advances, ready to
couple with substantial advancements when they occur. There is no
model in FOSS for a 'grand plan' sort of execution as suggested
here.. on any number of levels
with that said, it is the role of the thinker to examine all
assumptions, on that score, well done :-)
with regards to 'hardware signatures' I stand by the most basic free/
libre software principles, and there are many many thousands of very
capable programmers who do as well.
Now, if you suggested high-end gaming version of major FOSS software
packages, you would get my attention!!
best regards from "just north" of Silicon Valley
On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:08 PM, Barry Rowlingson wrote:
> I've not really thought this through, but I'll put it out there for
> Would the effort spent on creating the osgeo-live disc be better spent
> creating a 'portable' set of compiled applications, for Linux, Mac,
> and Windows platforms?
> The advantage would be that a user wanting to try something out would
> just copy the bits they wanted to their PC, and use their existing
> operating system. An installer would just copy what the user wanted
> and handle dependencies (much like osgeo4w, but multi-platform).
> It would also be more likely to be usable on machines with a
> locked-down boot sequence. Our central IT people supply desktops with
> passworded BIOS settings and HD-before-DVD boot sequence. They also
> physically lock the cases. Killjoys.
> There would also be no need for admin privileges - something that
> blights system package management systems like apt and rpm.
> Is it also true that in the very near future PCs will have some kind
> of trusted boot system? So that alternate operating systems would
> require signing (or I read something about a signed mini-bootloader
> being developed to possibly get round this...). Will that effect live
> DVD boots? That could be a pain...
> The disadvantages:
> Loss of total control - we wouldn't know exactly what OS the programs
> were going onto, so documentation might look wrong.
> Binary compatibility - how can you ensure your binaries work with
> assorted Linux versions? That might be the show-stopper here, although
> I'm pretty sure I've recently installed Linux software from
> one-size-fits-all binaries. Would the only compatibility be to do with
> libc and the kernel? I envisage practically everything being on there,
> including things like the Qt library and a JVM.
> There would be a need to re-tool all the osgeo-live development
> chain, and write an installer.
> There would be three versions - Linux, Windows, Mac (or four if
> anyone wants to compile for OpenSolaris...)
> I just think there's greater longevity and value in the distribution
> of a collection of ready-to-run, run-anywhere packages than a live
> boot disk these days.
OSGeo California Chapter
More information about the Osgeolive