Subject: Re: Logo,RPMs,Version

From: Steve Freitas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:05:16 -0700

>My suggestion is that we post all logos which come in (I think I saw
>at least three of them in the works) and then just have a vote on the
>list.

I vote for this too.

>About RPM/Source;
>I just *love* RPMs.

Yes. If we can create RPMs which include the features people want (e.g. 
rand*num, DHX, proper alias line for /etc/conf.modules in RH6.2, etc.), 
we'll remove an immense amount of pain for users.

>I think the testing of new releases can be made more efficient by
>offering RPMs. Not everybody has the time to do recompiles for every
>new version, and I think we need as many testers as we can find.

I agree with this. Unless someone can show me line-by-line *for my 
distro* how to compile the thing with all the arcane Makefile mods and 
switches, it's way too much work for a non-expert like me.

>About versions;
>What about using the Linux numbering scheme, with odd numbers as devel
>branches, and even as stable branches? Next stable would be 1.4 or 1.6

Hmm. I guess how valuable that is is in direct proportion to the amount 
of people who understand that numbering scheme. The only downside is that 
it reduces the number of inter-major releases (e.g. 1.0 to 2.0) to 5 
rather than 10, but I suppose that's bearable. I'll abstain on this one.

Steve Freitas

---

From: andrew morgan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:02:39 -0700 (PDT)

> we'll remove an immense amount of pain for users.

I think this is a good idea, but it seems like it might be tough to
account for all the necessary crypto libraries.  randnum requires DES,
which is fairly standard, but the DHX support requires openssl, which does
not come on most distributions right now (due to export restrictions, I
believe).  I'm not a whiz with RPM's, so maybe there are simple ways
around this.

> switches, it's way too much work for a non-expert like me.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just unfamiliar with all the problems
people are having.  I run netatalk on redhat 5.2, 6.1, and 6.2.  I start
with pre-asun37b or 39_test.  All I modify is the top-level Makefile.  I
set my installation directory, uncomment PAMDIR, and check that CRYPTODIR
points to my openssl install. Then just make, make install.

What distributions are causing problems, and how can we fix this?

	Andy

---

From: Magnus Stenman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:11:22 +0200

> believe).  I'm not a whiz with RPM's, so maybe there are simple ways

There are openssl RPMs at www.modssl.org, (but not on www.openssl.org,
go figure)

Maybe this one should be mirrored wherever the netatalk RPMs are/will be
stored, if the RPM shold require it.

> points to my openssl install. Then just make, make install.

For some, the actual process of doing the config/compile/finding DES
libs, etc is just too much of a hassle.

For some the compile is not a biggie, especially when we get a decent
configure autoconf script, but not having RPMs just takes too much
time when you have multiple boxes..

I bet mutt and proftpd got lots of more "testers" when they started
offering RPMs.

> What distributions are causing problems, and how can we fix this?

(I'm talking RPM doing modification of conf.modules, services, etc.
 The location of headers and libs, etc is best taken care of in the
 autoconf stuff.)

The difference between RH derived versions, and between RH vers
themselves is always a hassle... But a good bet would probably be to
go for RedHat 6.2 and try to make the %post scripts try to be a bit
intelligent, so they can cope with RH6.1,6.0 and Mandrake, et al.

It might even be possible to install a RPM on, say Mandrake, even if
it does not build there.. (not optimal, but)

/magnus

-- 
 Magnus Stenman   mailto:[email-masked]   http://www.hkust.se

 Get it up, keep it up.  Linux -- Viagra for your PC

---

From: bryan stalcup <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:15:57 -0400

Hi!

i've got a file server (netatalk and samba, RHLinux 6.1) with the following
specs:

1G Ram
Dual 550Mhz PIII
~340G of RAID5 (mostly on Ultra160 SCSI software RAID5)
Gigabit Ethernet over fiber

it's clients are:

12 G3/G4's with switched 100BT, and 4 NT4 boxes with Gigabit Ethernet over
fiber.

with one active mac client, i generate 15-20% cpu usage as reported by top
for just the afpd process. this just doesn't seem right. i also experience
15-20% cpu usage with samba (smbd process) for just one NT4 client, which
also seems high, but is a little easier to accept considering the speed of
the link. under a heavy load, it takes 30-60 seconds to refresh a finder
window, and my 20Mb Photoshop files creep across the network...

is there something i'm missing? seems i remember someone mentioning some kind
of issue with SMP and RH6.x and netatalk, but i'm not sure where to go from
here. would a faster, single CPU do better?

thanks,
bryan stalcup

---

From: David R Bosso <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:41:56 -0700

> window, and my 20Mb Photoshop files creep across the network...

Are you running over TCP/IP?  What version of Netatalk?

I'm seeing excellent performance (60-70% utilization of 100Base-T) using 
test-39 on a P3-533.

I'd also like to know about Linux SMP issues.  I'm about to add a 2nd 
processor to my Linux box that's running Netatalk.

-David