headers
Paolo Salvan | 1 Oct 2003 18:49
Picon

Re: ...better scripting language?

Hi!

If it can interest, I've discovered LUA (see http://www.lua.org and
http://lua-users.org ), a clean, nice and really small scripting
language...

Language footprint should be about 50-200Kb (I've seen a cutted
implementation in the mknbi tarball, with a "zipped" footprint of only
35kb!), really reasonable, and bindings exist for tk and wx widget... it
could open GUI development for thinstation!

Surely not to include it in this thinstation version, but to consider
for the future...

Bye!

Paolo

Miles Roper ha scritto:
> 
> I'm not really willing to change the scripting language at this stage,
> perhaps in 2.0, but will need to make savings with room elsewhere, as our
> image needs fit into 32 meg of ram, it only just does this and work
> reliably, still get the odd problem with X running out of memory when people
> view some PowerPoint presentations or have 25 docs open at once.  if someone
> can find a solution to that then I'd be more willing to look at it (i've
> looked and looked, see previous posts).
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miles Roper | 1 Oct 2003 22:33
Picon
Favicon

RE: TS 1.1 LOGFILE Deleted

cheeers, fixed for a3, which will include kernel 2.4.22 and a few more fixes
:o)

Cheers

Miles

-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Schmidt [mailto:KS@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 October 2003 03:25 a.m.
To: Miles Roper
Subject: TS 1.1 LOGFILE Deleted

Hi Miles,

I downloaded your wonderful TS 1.1 alpha release. Thanks very much!

I do have some troubles with it, will tell you when I know why. (Mouse not 
detected, XF-Config file strange ..)
Debuging that I found that $LOGFILE is deleted at:
/xf-common/etc/init.d/x

console)

line 181 and line 182
... > $LOGFILE
should (most likely) be >> $LOGFILE to append and show everthing from the
very 
beginning.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mike Eriksen | 2 Oct 2003 11:21
Picon
Picon

Re: Thinstation 1.1 Alpha 2 Release

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Miles Roper wrote:

[cut]
> Mike, please burn and test your new iso file, the changes you sent me are
> included (a little modified though)

Works perfectly! 1.1 looks *very* promissing. I really like the new layout 
of the config files.

Mike
--

-- 
Thinstation FAQ maintainer
http://thinstation.sourceforge.net
- a light, full featured linux based thin client OS
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miles Roper | 2 Oct 2003 22:38
Picon
Favicon

RE: Thinstation 1.1 Alpha 2 Release

yeah, things are a lot tidier, should be easier to maintain stuff in future.

had a look at the www module?

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Eriksen [mailto:kme3@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 October 2003 09:22 p.m.
To: Miles Roper
Cc: Thinstation-Developer (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [Thinstation-developer] Thinstation 1.1 Alpha 2 Release

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Miles Roper wrote:

[cut]
> Mike, please burn and test your new iso file, the changes you sent me are
> included (a little modified though)

Works perfectly! 1.1 looks *very* promissing. I really like the new layout 
of the config files.

Mike
--

-- 
Thinstation FAQ maintainer
http://thinstation.sourceforge.net
- a light, full featured linux based thin client OS
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Paolo Salvan | 2 Oct 2003 12:22
Picon

Boot image proposal...

Hi!

This what I'd like to see as ts' boot screen... what do you think?

Miles, is it ok? Can you include it?

bye!

Paolo
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miles Roper | 3 Oct 2003 07:01
Picon
Favicon

RE: Thinstation blackbox style proposal...

have implemented the style and background by using

wmsetbg

is about a 80k + the jpeg lib with is needed for ica anyhow, at 120k

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Eriksen [mailto:kme3@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 October 2003 11:49 p.m.
To: Paolo Salvan
Cc: Miles Roper
Subject: Thinstation blackbox style proposal...

I think this blackbox style goes well with Paolo's picture :-)
Still a bit rough, and you have to manually correct the path of the 
picture in the bottom of the style.

Mike

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Paolo Salvan wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> This what I'd like to see as ts' boot screen... what do you think?
> 
> Miles, is it ok? Can you include it?
> 
> bye!
> 
> Paolo
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miles Roper | 3 Oct 2003 07:15
Picon
Favicon

RE: ...better scripting language?

Hi Paolo & Other Developers,

My first question is why do we want to look at a better scripting language?

What things are lacking in our current scripting language (ash) that the new
one would do?

I just want to make sure we are going to be getting a real benefit from
changing.  I think a lot of scripts would still need to remain using ash as
I see little benefit in changing them.

I can see some benefits for the menu generation, but is it really worth it?

Cheers

Miles

-----Original Message-----
From: Paolo Salvan [mailto:alke@...]
Sent: Thursday, 2 October 2003 04:49 a.m.
To: Miles Roper
Cc: Thinstation-developer
Subject: Re: [Thinstation-developer] ...better scripting language?

Hi!

If it can interest, I've discovered LUA (see http://www.lua.org and
http://lua-users.org ), a clean, nice and really small scripting
language...
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Paolo Salvan | 3 Oct 2003 14:51
Picon

Re: ...better scripting language?

Hi!

I've seen that often ts scripts are a mix-up of ash, grep, awk and so
on...

...And often you had to write criptic lines to make simple things :-(

I'm sure that a REAL language would have speeded development a lot, and
it would have made things simpler and tidier.

I said that Lua is a scripting language....it isn't really correct, it
is a very-high-level-language, with a clean and simple syntax, advanced
data structures, objects and so on...

(My dream was to use Python, but it is not really lightweight... it is
really nice, can do everything, but have a too big footprint :-(  )

The web server and cgi could be tidied up a lot (ie having a
simple-but-real template engine...), and probably a lot of scripts would
be simpler, more modular and more reliable...

It could also be really useful for GUI development... I found that Lua
have a Tk binding, it opens us a lot of nice developments... ;o)

Paolo

Miles Roper ha scritto:
> 
> Hi Paolo & Other Developers,
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miles Roper | 4 Oct 2003 08:09
Picon
Favicon

RE: tiny editor

Hi Kai,

I've included this on the dev mailing list.

Local editor wise, I've been doing some more looking and can't find anything
without ncurses.  But I guess I want to go back a step first, and ask why
are we trying to include a text editor anyhow?  Thinstation is meant to be a
thinclient, by definition a PC which connects to another server for all the
useful apps.  Why do we want to include in in the build in the first place?

Anyone else have a point of view?

Cheers

Miles

-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Schmidt [mailto:KS@...]
Sent: Friday, 3 October 2003 10:46 p.m.
To: Miles Roper
Subject: tiny editor

Am Freitag, 3. Oktober 2003 07:07 schrieb Miles Roper:
> Hi Kai,
>
> I've looked at nano, but need ncurses, what I would like would be a self
> contained small editor.  Let me know if you find something :o)

I hate to say that, but with busybox 1.0 there is a simplified VI, but again
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Miles Roper | 4 Oct 2003 08:25
Picon
Favicon

RE: tiny editor

Hi Kai,

Something I forgot about httpd.

Firstly I would like to point out I know VERY little about how http stuff
works.

I did look at busybox httpd but I didn't know how to execute the scripts
like I currently do.  Being able to pull out run-time commands is really
useful.  Could you do that with another httpd?  I someone wants to re-write
the www package in a more effectient way, or has a thought on how to do this
let me know.

Btw, most of the scripts were taken from PXES, Paolo has modified + updated
some.  Very little of it has come from me.

The thing I like about the current httpd is its size, its small.  It does
most of what I want it to do.  It seems fairly easy to maintain the new
templates Paolo sent.  I don't really have a problem with it.  The www
package is solely for admins checking the state of the PC and remote
control.  Thoughts anyone?

Cheers

Miles

-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Schmidt [mailto:KS@...]
Sent: Friday, 3 October 2003 10:46 p.m.
To: Miles Roper
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane