meta questions ...

[Manik Taneja]

custom*

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Manik Taneja <manik.taneja at canonical.com>
wrote:

> Welcome to Snappy Jerry!
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:33 AM, <g4 at novadsp.com> wrote:
>
>> I’m particularly interested in the embedded space but am not quite sure
>> how Snappy is going to empower me on (say) the Bone. And I’ve not yet been
>> able to discover enough background to dissuade me from feeling we might be
>> getting close to a Windows ‘signed driver’ ecosystem (?)
>>
>>
>>
>> Although I can see how to build Ubuntu for the Pi (for example) , there
>> does not yet seem to be analogous open access to the Snappy kernel repo,
>> indeed any clear idea of what/what is not configured. Is this going to be
>> pattern moving forward?
>>
>>
>>
>> There was a comment from Mark yesterday:
>>
>>
>>
>> “* create your own kernel snap, with the modules you want, for your own
>> devices, or
>>
>> * convince us to stick that module in the standard kernel snap”
>>
>>
>>
>> Which makes me feel like I’ve desperately missed something.
>>
>>
>>
>> As  a practical example, how would I get a specialist kernel mode driver
>> into the mix? Where, in this case, the B3 is a USB device interfaced to a
>> plurality (as the patent lawyers like to say) of audio codecs and other
>> bits and pieces? It strikes me as unlikely that Canonical would necessarily
>> want to have my driver ‘in-box’. So does that mean I now miss out on
>> regular updates and all the other goodies?
>>
> A Snappy system is comprised of the Platform(kernel), Gadget(default
> device configuration) and Core OS Snap. Essentially, you have the option to
> provide your own kernel and gadget snaps that will be hosted by Canonical
> in the Snap store and can then be used by anyone else who so chooses. In
> this situation, an image can be created with your customer kernel which can
> get all the benefits of system updates and the app marketplace.
>
> On the other hand, the only reason we would consider including a kernel
> module as part of our standard kernel snap is for that kernel module to
> exist upstream and be compiled from our kernel sources!
>
>>
>>
>> And this sort of use case raises another question: how does  a
>> Windows/Mac user of a Ubuntu powered USB device actually access the Snappy
>> eco-system if they have a headless board with (potentially) only Ethernet
>> over USB for connection to the wider world … ? I’m feeling like there might
>> have to be a degree of host side infrastructure to support the update
>> process?
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me emphasize that this is all friendly questioning too. The embedded
>> Linux space really, desperately, needs something to prevent fragmentation
>> and duplication of effort, **especially** for the Bone et al..
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for listening.
>>
>>
>>
>> BR
>>
>>
>>
>> Jerry.
>>
>> --
>> snappy-devel mailing list
>> snappy-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snappy-devel
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/snappy-devel/attachments/20150805/87d1637b/attachment.html>