Categories

  • 13k Topics
    115k Posts
    Tom ElliottT

    @Fog_Newb As to “a bunch of stuff deleted”

    Yes, in the past we shipped all the ipxe binaries we natively built with FOG, then those would end up being rebuilt if https.

    The process is still the same, but I decided to update to iPXE 2.0.0 and split the repo so we have a central point for new builds (similar to now Kernels/Inits are done as well) and worked very hard to begin basic level support for Secure boot capabilities.

    The SB enabled part still (as it stands today) requires enrolling the key on each machine (so still tedious) but we build the key, provide a UI bit of information to what needs to do and that was part of why you see the “many files deleted” in short.

    So yes, lots of changes, all expected.

    I would ask, if you don’t mind, upgrading to 1.6 and see if that fairs a little better as all these new things also got put in there, but there’s also a lot more I think most poeple might actually enjoy.

  • Get the latest news on what's happening.
    184 Topics
    825 Posts
    A

    @Tom-Elliott I really appreciate that you are putting effort into providing more frequent releases, which makes it easier for everyone to deploy new security fixes in time. Keep up the good work!

  • View tutorials or talk about FOG in general.
    2k Topics
    19k Posts
    8

    @Cpasjuste

    Thank you, I appreciate that. And yes, I did spend a lot of time on it.

    I agree that it bypasses the official installer in order to make use of Docker environment variables; however, at this stage, I don’t believe that FOG is going to change so dramatically that it’ll break it often.

    I will add that if this could get adopted as an official docker image, we could work with the FOG team to make sure nothing gets to pushed to the FOG code that would break the container until we can adjust the container as well.

  • Report bugs, request features, or get the latest progress.
    2k Topics
    21k Posts
    Tom ElliottT

    @Lucas26 Thanks for letting us know and should be fixed in the latest.

    Also found a similar class of bug for FTP ports and we are porting the FTP side to dev-branch as we speak.

    Please let us know if this is working now?

91

Online

12.7k

Users

17.6k

Topics

156.8k

Posts