[Rack] 10 thin client terminals - specs? purpose?

Dr. Jesus j at hug.gs
Tue Jan 11 10:35:38 PST 2011


On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Patrick Keys <citizenkeys at gmail.com> wrote:
> DrJesus: Can one of these also power the door so we can get the door
> script off of pony?
>
> Based on the prior thread, it seems that pony was intended to be for
> public consumption.  However, pony ended up running the door script and
> other things.  Also, people didn't want to play on pony for fear of
> breaking somebody else's projects.

Pony doesn't have to run the door script.  See my email on 12/23 about
Stallion.  That's where all that stuff should be deployed.  If you
don't want those services on pony move them to stallion.

> It would be nice if these terminals resulted in essential noisebridge
> services being taken off of pony so people that do development (like me)
> can actually play with pony.  I'd also like to get a xen hypervisor
> setup so everybody can have a virtual root:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xen

Everyone can have actual root on the Noisecloud boxes.  In case it
wasn't clear the last time we talked about it, there is an option to
have persistent storage on the cluster.

I have plenty of other machines you can screw around with Xen on, and
quite frankly I need someone to do some Xen related libvirt stuff for
the other nonprofit.  Sure, you could deploy it on Pony, but it's
pretty memory-poor and the upstream Internet connection is limited.

You're probably thinking, well, Pony is here at 2169 and I need a
physical console to set up Xen, but most of the other machines I'm
talking about have full lights-out management.  You actually have
*more* remote control over them than you ever would have for Pony.

There's also qemu and the chroot build scripts if you just want a VM
for development, but those solutions might not provide enough of a
learning experience since they sort of just start working with a few
minutes of work.


More information about the Rack mailing list