Hello all, I'm thinking about wrapping up a 3.70 release, even though gpxelinux.0 is technically not feature-complete. I'd like people's opinion on it. -hpa
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa at zytor.com> writes:> I'm thinking about wrapping up a 3.70 release, even though gpxelinux.0 > is technically not feature-complete. I'd like people's opinion on it."Release early and often." :) But what does "not feature-complete" mean? -- Cheers, Feri.
Ferenc Wagner wrote:> "Release early and often." :) But what does "not feature-complete" mean?jup.. and you can always declare one of parts (whole gpxelinux.0, or just some features of it, whatever) as experimental. -- Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: daniel.baumann at panthera-systems.net Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
NOTICE: original subject was '[syslinux] 3.70 without "finished" gpxelinux.0?' Op 07-06-2008 om 16:41 schreef H. Peter Anvin:> Hello all, > > I'm thinking about wrapping up a 3.70 release, even though gpxelinux.0 > is technically not feature-complete. I'd like people's opinion on it.Opinion of Geert Stappers about 3.70 and gpxelinux.0: I would like to see that the next release of the syslinux bootloader family will be shipped with gpxelinux.0 included. Having HTTP support in "pxelinux" is great. The thing that me most plesant surprised in gpxelinux.0 was how easy it was to switch from TFTP to HTTP (infact a true speed-up). With DHCP option 209, pxelinux.configfile and option 210, pxelinux.pathprefix I told that 'http://webserver.my.lan/path/boot/gpxelinux.conf' is the "pxelinux.cfg/default" and didn't need further modification in "pxelinux.cfg/default". Kernel and initrd were fetched from 'http://webserver.my.lan/path/boot/'! ( even bootscreen files ("f1.txt") did go over HTTP :- ) gpxelinux.0 might technically not feature-complete, but it contains allready a very nice feature. Cheers Geert Stappers -- Release Early, Release Often
Peter, Please release 3.70, including the gpxelinux.0. Loads of cool things can be done with it regardless of the fact that it is not feature complete. I'd suggest adding some kind of chart comparing the features of both pxelinux.0 and gpxelinux.0 That way people can pick the one that's right for them and you can mark the features that are not completed. Regards, Nico On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 1:41 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote:> Hello all, > > I'm thinking about wrapping up a 3.70 release, even though gpxelinux.0 > is technically not feature-complete. I'd like people's opinion on it. > > -hpa > > _______________________________________________ > SYSLINUX mailing list > Submissions to SYSLINUX at zytor.com > Unsubscribe or set options at: > http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux > Please do not send private replies to mailing list traffic. > >
H. Peter Anvin wrote:> Hello all, > > I'm thinking about wrapping up a 3.70 release, even though gpxelinux.0 > is technically not feature-complete. I'd like people's opinion on it. > > -hpa >I haven't kept up on the devel releases, would 3.70 include both pxelinux and gpxelinux? If so I see no reason to not release it. Just throw up an warning on gpxelinux to let people know what is broken. Potentially this will be beneficial, as it will get more eyes on it and hopefully help solve any bugs faster. It could also allow for changes should someone come up with feature X which is a large change to something not fully implemented? I do know that gpxelinux is broken in regards to loading other pxe stacks, does the same apply to it being loaded by pxelinux? It would be nice to start trying it out, and converting some of my images that do not have the pxe stack requirement (without changing my dhcp config). -Andrew
Andrew Stuart wrote:>>> I do know that gpxelinux is broken in regards to loading other pxe >>> stacks, does the same apply to it being loaded by pxelinux? It would be >>> nice to start trying it out, and converting some of my images that do >>> not have the pxe stack requirement (without changing my dhcp config). >> pxelinux can load gpxelinux just fine. Of course, that all will go >> through TFTP. >> >> -hpa > > To be clear, you mean just the normal stuff, and gpxelinux.0, after > which it will be able to anything it does by itself and not that it will > be limited to only TFTP, correct? >Correct. -hpa