www.zeroshell.org Forum Index www.zeroshell.org
Linux Distribution for server and embedded devices
 
 SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile  Log inLog in  Log in to check your private messagesPrivate Message 

porting

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.zeroshell.org Forum Index -> ZeroShell
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
R-Type



Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:44 am    Post subject: porting Reply with quote

I was going to try porting zeroshell to buildroot and get everything working with uclibc/busybox, but there seems to be no source for the 'kerbynet' binary. Will this component be licensed in an open source form when the cvs becomes available?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fulvio
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Nov 2006
Posts: 1072

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kerbynet is written in C++. Its task is to interpret the html templates placed in the directory /root/kerbynet.cgi/templates and use the scripts placed in /root/kerbynet.cgi/scripts to interact with the system. I am still thinking to the type of license with which this component will be released. In any case, I will decide when the stable version of Zeroshell will be released.

Regards
Fulvio
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
R-Type



Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, not a problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fulvio
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Nov 2006
Posts: 1072

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In any case, I'd like to know in greater details what you want to do with BusyBox. Could you explain?

Regards
Fulvio
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
R-Type



Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

buildroot allows an easy way to maintain embedded projects and port them to other architectures. While I haven't investigated thoroughly, it would seem that uclibc and busybox in place of glibc, bash and apache would decrease the footprint size substantially, even if the gcc libstdc++ was kept. glibc is huge.

For learning purposes and fun, I was going to attempt a port of zeroshell to a little old alpha machine and see how well it handles routing for home use. If it turned out to be too slow, I would look for a more powerful embedded solution. The consumer routers are too slow for my needs, yet I don't want to run a full pc 24/7 to route. I was looking at your project because it offers a nice easy way to configure vpns/nat/qos/radius without a nasty mess of shell scripts like I'm using now :X. What drew me to it initially was the freeradius server and wireless management integration, along with a solid web interface. There are other router projects out there, but none seem to do all of this competently while being completely open source. openwrt comes closest but its web interface is lacking. This is why I was asking about 'kerbynet' and I understand perfectly if you want to keep that closed. It appears like it's the hub of the whole project. I was just inquiring.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ishanaba



Joined: 10 May 2014
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2014 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@fulvio

have you released kerbynet source?

Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.zeroshell.org Forum Index -> ZeroShell All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group