@ rodluz,

Sorry I missed your newer post.

Yeah I checked and it is enabled . I will disable it once I have this in production and off of the web as yes selinux will block aspects of FOG

Just as a datum, I found FOG to work very well with redhat distros. I am not a fan of debian based distros due to package management and stablility - debian I can get working, ubuntu though…

You can set this as resolved.

Matt

@slawa-jad Single disk resizable is able to be put on smaller/larger drives and it should be expanding once the image completes.

The “Fixed size” partitions wouldn’t be touched as far as size goes because that’s expected.

I think we need more details to understand and help with he issue. Resizable does what it seems you’re saying it’s not doing. Please help us help you with more details such as Images of the error’s you’re seeing, and what you’ve tried.

@Fog_Newb Yep, it’s as I suspected:

The Line:

Subsystem sftp /usr/lib/openssh/sftp-server

should be changed to:

Subsystem sftp internal-sftp

Then restart ssh services: systemctl restart sshd

Then your Storage Node testing should succeed!

@george1421 said in Dell OptiPlex 3000 Thin Client:

@phant0mbot said in Dell OptiPlex 3000 Thin Client:

The Thin Client is able to pxe boot and accepts the image, but then can’t get past booting the final time.

It just attempts to boot from hard drive on the Fogproject Menu and keeps refreshing.

Just to be clear here. You CAN get to the FOG iPXE menu?

What happens when you pick a FOG iPXE menu. This will cause bzImage and init.xz to the target computer. Does the kernel attempt to boot?

@george1421 Hello!

I CAN get to the FOX iPXE Menu. On the FOG menu I select “Boot from Hard Disk” and then the screen will show, “Booting from SAN device 0x80” and then go back to the menu after a few seconds.

I have tried both SAN and GRUB exit options and the result is the same.

@Fog_Newb Yep, it’s as I suspected:

The Line:

Subsystem sftp /usr/lib/openssh/sftp-server

should be changed to:

Subsystem sftp internal-sftp

Then restart ssh services: systemctl restart sshd

Then your Storage Node testing should succeed!

@george1421 I see now and you’re right as my clients are all legacy boot/BIOS boot non UEFI and would not benefit from the client-arch examination.

I’ve already declarations set for each host in my dhcpd.conf file in terms if MAC to IP and so adding another field of filename “some boot loader file” won’t be impossible.

Thanks you for this exercise as I’ve learned some very important things here.

Not sure if anybody has actually had a chance to look at my docker image yet. I’m throwing my hat in the ring for maintaining an official image, but I’d need some help with it.

@Jchinn412 The answer is it depends on how you have your disk structure setup

Post the results of these two commands.

lsblk
df -h

It maybe easy or harder (but not impossible) depending on how you have the disk created.

@ecoele What version of FOG are you running? I presume “stable” which we learned of a problem with the report downloads.

Please checkout dev-branch and install it and you should have the ability to download the reports again.

Or wait until Oct 15th when the next release will be rolled out including these fixes.

@Richarizard504 I’m not really sure how to help:

Can you do a hard refresh in your browser and see if that helps anything?

(CTRL + SHIFT + R in chrome generally)

I have a screencast where i show you all I did, and all works, so I’m thinking maybe cache isn’t loading the updated Javascript elements necessary for this to function appropriately.

Because I’m not affiliated with FOG in any official capacity and I’ve never actually contributed to it in any way before, I completely avoided making any actual changes to the source. I have noticed that there could be a couple of things that could make the docker implementation a little easier though, specifically around the FOG services themselves. I’m not entirely sure they are completely container friendly, but I really need more hands on this to test it out thoroughly.

Also, I used Debian 13 as the base image for this and it ends up being pretty large (2.5GB). It might be possible to shrink this with alpine-linux but I didn’t want to break a bunch of stuff and then have to spend more time chasing those bugs. Anybody that wants to work that angle, please feel free.

@Tom-Elliott I figured it out.

I was getting confused by the similar language between the installation process and storage group setup.

A normal installation is just a fog storage node that has a web server and UI on it. A FOG network requires atleast one to work. However a Storage node can be set as the master of a storage group no matter the installation type.

My problem was that because the storage node in the “Bris” storage group did not have a master node setup, the default group could not replicate any images or snapins over. All storage groups must have a master for it to work effectively.

@Tom-Elliott feel free to clarify any of the above rant.

Thank you for the information. I used a bare metal machine. I started with a VM but then just used a old pc. I tried it with Fedora then Ubuntu but did not have any luck. I did not get any errors when installing with the install script.

I will take a look at the information you gave me and see if I can get anything working.

@collegestjoseph Can you try out this testing kernel and let us know if it works? https://github.com/rluzuriaga/fos/releases/tag/EXP_20250927

@Tom-Elliott
Hi
using the new version of ipxe build I can confirm that the ipxe menu works with the keyboard.
The problem is that chainloading grub, the keyboard doesn’t work.
With ipxe 1.0.0 it works. So by now we keep using the old version.

Lorenzo

@Frode-Woldsund

I created an image. Give it a go and let me know

https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/18000/unofficial-docker-image-beta

@tchavei2

check out my image! Let me know if it works for you

https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/18000/unofficial-docker-image-beta

@JJ-Fullmer @ramone

I created an image, check my post here

https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/18000/unofficial-docker-image-beta

I do believe it’ll be able to utilize an existing DB, but I haven’t tested it yet.