Hello Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora 12 planned)? The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11 installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group. For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary configuration settings must be taken care of in the background. Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration of the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written. Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel type for testing purposes. Regards, Simon.

Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2 differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin:

I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and RPMFusion repos

On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote: > Hello Orcan > > Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos > (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2 > differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin: > > (1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time" > kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be > used effectively with the standard kernel) > > (2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning > the users to the group that has real-time priority. > Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody) make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box. > With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always > be available in the standard Fedora repository. > Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work. > Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always > have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the > graphic drivers etc.. > That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that. Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would have happened already. > It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to > generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard > kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu - > since 8.10). > That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past. Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely do not want to have two kernels in Fedora. As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-) > Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do > this manually as well. > > I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and > RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling updates". > That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one > reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to > rolling updates. > Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update means? -- Fernando > As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora > distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion > or PlanetCCRMA or Livna > > Regards, Simon > > > > Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil: > >> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote: >> >> >>> Hello >>> >>> Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora >>> 12 planned)? >>> >>> The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for >>> jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11 >>> installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group. >>> >>> For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary >>> configuration settings must be taken care of in the background. >>> Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration of >>> the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written. >>> >>> Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should >>> be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having >>> the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic >>> driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel >>> type for testing purposes. >>> >>> >>> Regards, Simon. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to >> generate and maintain a spin. >> >> Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora, >> RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA? >> The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the >> spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the >> spin is Fedora based. >> >> We need ideas, manpower, time etc... >> >> Orcan >>

On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 20:05 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote: > Hello Fernando, > Apologies, I have seemed to stepped on a few toes here... > Sorry if I gave that impression, that's not what I felt. > Unfortunately for best operation of my laptop I need a the kernel > >> 2.6.30.x >> The latest rt patches are for 2.6.31 and I'm following that new set of patches with internal builds. So far so good (just today 2.6.31.6-rt19 came out). For running 2.6.31.x on< fc12 you need to disable modeset as the userland programs are too old (ie: "nomodeset" in the kernel boot line) and that has delayed me putting out a version for testing. I tried a patch to disable that internally in the kernel and was not successful (I can't really automatically add nomodeset to the grub boot line because then normal fedora kernels will pick that up afterwards and you don't want that happening). > You are right nothing is easy, on the other hand given that most of > (if not all??) the developers supplying patches to the real-time > branch of the Linux kernel are Red-Hat employees. At least that's what > the press says - I thought Fedora would have the best chance of > maintaining an up to date rt kernel in their repo. > That would have been my guess as well. But the feedback I got from them was not like that. Hopefully that will change over time... > As to packaging, it would be a great step forward if fedora / > rpmfusion were to have an open-build service like openSUSE. The > projects still have to be entered into build service but the time > compiling the different architecture / distribution versions is > reduced by build servers. > Both projects have "open" build servers. I don't know if the definition of "open" would match yours, but you can become a contributor and packager in both of them. I don't know how the openSUSE servers work. Best. -- Fernando > Am 10.11.2009 02:51, schrieb Fernando Lopez-Lezcano: > >> On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Simon Lewis wrote: >> >> >>> Hello Orcan >>> >>> Assuming that the user does and will install packages from all 3 repos >>> (Fedora, RPMFusion and PlanetCCRMA) then there are in fact only 2 >>> differences between the standard fedora spin and a "studio" type spin: >>> >>> (1) A kernel with enhanced pre-emption (the so called "real-time" >>> kernel - although this name is misleading as RT-PRIO settings can be >>> used effectively with the standard kernel) >>> >>> (2) The automatic configuration of the RT-PRIO settings and assigning >>> the users to the group that has real-time priority. >>> >>> >> Both currently available from Planet CCRMA. Rt kernels are available and >> the rtirq package in conjunction with a more modern jack server than in >> Fedora (with the proper priority and open rt permissions for everybody) >> make both work out of the Planet CCRMA box. >> >> >> >>> With regards to (1) the kernel with enhanced pre-emption should always >>> be available in the standard Fedora repository. >>> >>> >> Yes, that would be a must for serious audio work. >> >> >> >>> Indeed the standard and enhanced pre-emption kernels should always >>> have the same version number to maintain compatibility with the >>> graphic drivers etc.. >>> >>> >> That is a noble goal but it would be actually impossible to accomplish >> in the real world unless a lot of manpower were to be dedicated to that. >> Just as an example: there is _no_ rt patch available for the 2.6.30.x >> kernel series - so it would be impossible to create an rt kernel that >> matches the current fc11 kernel. Of course it would be possible to >> rebase the patch but who would do it? If that were "easy" it would have >> happened already. >> >> >> >>> It would be very little additional work for the kernel compilers to >>> generate the kernel with pre-emption at the same time as the standard >>> kernel (This is standard policy at openSUSE -since 10.3 - and Ubuntu - >>> since 8.10). >>> >>> >> That is not what the kernel maintainers at Fedora have said in the past. >> Last time I tried to push for this they just said they don't have the >> resources to do it (and presumable no interest as well). They definitely >> do not want to have two kernels in Fedora. >> >> As a long time packager I can say that hardly ever I find something that >> means "very little additional work". _Especially_ when packaging >> kernels :-) You are welcome to prove me wrong by packaging them :-) >> >> >> >>> Regarding (2) it would be nice to have an administrator's tool to do >>> this manually as well. >>> >>> I would prefer to see as many packages as possible in the Fedora and >>> RPMFusion repos as both these repos are subject to "rolling updates". >>> That is too say the packages are always kept upto date (which is one >>> reason why I like Fedora). The PlanetCCRMA repos are not subject to >>> rolling updates. >>> >>> >> Hmmm, I upgrade packages as soon as I can. Usually that means faster >> than Fedora (generally). Maybe I misunderstand what rolling update >> means? >> >> -- Fernando >> >> >> >> >>> As to the work load: (1) and (2) above apply to the standard fedora >>> distribution. The packages with tricky licensing issues to RPMFusion >>> or PlanetCCRMA or Livna >>> >>> Regards, Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 08.11.2009 04:23, schrieb Orcan Ogetbil: >>> >>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Lewis wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hello >>>>> >>>>> Please advise if a multimedia spin for Fedora 11 is available (or for Fedora >>>>> 12 planned)? >>>>> >>>>> The standard Fedora 11 installation does not by default set the RT-PRIO for >>>>> jackuser or pulse audio etc., etc. Neither does the standard Fedora 11 >>>>> installation automatically assign all users to the jackusers group. >>>>> >>>>> For the multimedia spin to be successful these and the other necessary >>>>> configuration settings must be taken care of in the background. >>>>> Alternatively an "multimedia administration tool" for easy configuration of >>>>> the pam/usergroup settings in an RT-enviroment should be written. >>>>> >>>>> Further, the standard-Kernel and RT-Kernel with same version number should >>>>> be available form the standard Fedora repository. This practice of having >>>>> the same version number for all kernel types makes it very easy for graphic >>>>> driver support etc., and means that Fedora can be booted with either kernel >>>>> type for testing purposes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, Simon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi. Yes there was an idea but I don't think we have enough people to >>>> generate and maintain a spin. >>>> >>>> Moreover I am not sure where the spin should originate: Fedora, >>>> RPMFusion or PlanetCCRMA? >>>> The latter two has nice packages that we would like the have in the >>>> spin, but we can't allow some (if not all) of these packages if the >>>> spin is Fedora based. >>>> >>>> We need ideas, manpower, time etc... >>>> >>>> Orcan >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >

> Where do I find the open build servers in Fedora / RPMFusion? By open > build (with openSUSE) you can create one or more projects on > openSUSE's server and the server is used to compile the sources based > on your configuration settings.

> Whilst the input of the data and the > configuration of the project takes time their seems to be an advantage > in that the different architectures can be compiled in one run.

In the case of Fedora you have to become a contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join and more specifically: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers I presume the process is similar on RPMFusion.