..and one FOG-VM to rule them all.
-
@george1421 the scripts re-configure dnsmasq every time the IP of the box changes. See line 216 in the script.
-
@george1421 Thanks George/Wayne, so won’t the MakeFogMobile install.sh script install the current version of dnsmasq? Are you saying to run that script and then put the ltsp.conf with the content you listed into /etc/dnsmasq.d/ ? Will there already be a ltsp.conf file in there that I’ll need to overwrite? Just want to get all my ducks in a row before I try this.
-
@lof you need to install dnsmasq manually. Its not a direct function of fog.
-
@george1421 Thanks George, so the mobile script doesn’t install dnsmasq as Tom said yesterday? Sorry, that’s where I got the idea that the dnsmasq install would already be covered during the MakeFogMobile install.
-
@lof Mmmmm. I’m pretty sure that dnsmasq is not added by the script, but the script will manage dnsmasq if its installed. Wayne wrote the script so he would know for sure. But, if it was me, I would just install dnsmasq and be done with it.
Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG!
-
@george1421 Oh ok, I’m looking at the tarballs now: www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/ Look’s like dnsmasq-2.78.tar.gz is what I need. The software manager in Linux Mint has it listed but it’s only showing version 2.75 It says I already have the Dnsmasq-base (executable/docs) installed but its version 2.75 Do you think I should uninstall that?
-
@lof well you need the fixes in 2.76. I’m a bit surprised that mint is not current.
[edit] I just checked and ubuntu 16.04 is a bit behind. They only support 2.75 as you noted. Newer versions of ubuntu do support later releases of dnsmasq. I do have instructions on compiling your own copy. It should work with the tarball you found. I have not tested it with 2.78, but I guess try: https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/8725/compiling-dnsmasq-2-76-if-you-need-uefi-support
-
@george1421 When I created the initial VM a few weeks ago, I installed all available updates before installing FOG but haven’t installed any after. I remember a couple years back when I had FOG installed, I installed available updates for Mint and it broke my FOG install. Re-running the FOG install fixed the issue but I’ve been afraid of installing OS updates ever since.
-
@george1421 said in ..and one FOG-VM to rule them all.:
I’m pretty sure that dnsmasq is not added by the script,
It does install the latest version of dnsmasq available from the OS’s package manager.
If 2.76 is required for UEFI, this can be manually installed before hand.
-
@george1421 Thanks George, so what if I don’t need UEFI support? I haven’t encountered a situation yet where I couldn’t do my deployments with UEFI disabled. I usually disable it, enable legacy, deploy the image and then turn UEFI back on. Would dnsmasq 2.75 suffice for that?
-
@lof yes, if no uefi then you don’t need 2.76 and also don’t use my configuration. You need the older 2.75 config and earlier. In your case you will need to create a link from undionly.kpxe to undionly.kpxe.0 and ipxe.efi to ipxe.efi.0 since the older releases always added .0 onto the end of what ever the configuration file calls for.
-
@george1421 Ok great, then in my case I just do the MakeFogMobile install, create those links and go with that. Thanks for all the help. I know others out there definitely want UEFI support, especially since it was announced that hardware vendors will eventually pull the plug on legacy. I’ll cross that bridge when it happens, hopefully by that time Linux Mint will include a more current version of dnsmasq
One last question, should I be concerned about installing OS updates after installing FOG? Do OS updates still break things like PHP? Does doing a re-install of FOG still address those issues? Ok that’s three questions, …sorry.
-
@wayne-workman In an enterprise environment with established DHCP and DNS one would quickly have their ass hauled onto the carpet if multiple roaming rogue DHCP and DNS servers were deployed using the combined solution offered for mobilizing FOG.
I think it would be better to also offer a FOG-centric version of the mobile FOG solution that doesn’t involve tacking on unnecessary and potentially career-damaging services.
I’m hoping the development of 2.0 hasn’t strayed from a long lost posit that promised to stay focused on FOG first. Compartmentalize solutions by addressing DNS and DHCP services as separate non-FOG accessories.
-
@sudburr said in ..and one FOG-VM to rule them all.:
In an enterprise environment with established DHCP and DNS one would quickly have their ass hauled onto the carpet if multiple roaming rogue DHCP and DNS servers were deployed using the combined solution offered for mobilizing FOG.
Understood. Good thing the project lists exactly what it does so that one’s ass can avoid being hauled to the carpet. Also, the community scripts is open for all to contribute. You can edit the existing code or create an entire copy and modify it.
@sudburr said in ..and one FOG-VM to rule them all.:
I think it would be better to also offer a FOG-centric version of the mobile FOG solution that doesn’t involve tacking on unnecessary and potentially career-damaging services.
A good starting point for this would be the updateIP script:
https://github.com/FOGProject/fog-community-scripts/tree/master/updateIP -
Thanks for all the help so far. I ran the mobile install as root and it finished. I also did some initial testing to ensure I could access the FOG console after changing my VM’s network settings to use DHCP. It worked fine and even worked when I switched from a bridged to a NAT connection in VMware Workstation. I didn’t have time to try PXE-booting a test machine yet but will do that next.
Also, re: what @sudburr said, …I definitely see the concern and already took that into consideration before pushing ahead with this. In my particular situation it won’t be an issue since the locations I’ll be using this at don’t have any hardware set to PXE-boot other than VOIP phones and those operate on a separate VLAN. Also, I’ll be using my FOG VM very infrequently and it will only be in operation when I’m imaging new machines. Anyway, I think this is going to be the best/easiest way to go for me.
-
@george1421 Hi George, quick question for you… where are the undionly.kpxe and ipxe.efi files supposed to reside? I see two versions of undionly.kpxe in /Downloads/fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp and /Downloads/fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp/10secdelay ipxe.efi = /fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp /fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp/10secdelay /fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp/10secdelay/i386-efi /fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp/i386-7156-efi and /fog_1.4.4/packages/tftp/i386-efi
Which location should I create the symlink from? i.e., symlink to undionly.kpxe.0 / ipxe.efi.0
-
@lof said in ..and one FOG-VM to rule them all.:
where are the undionly.kpxe and ipxe.efi files supposed to reside
After you install fog, they are located on the server in
/tftpboot -
@lof Wayne is right, both are in /tftpboot. That is where you need to create the symbolic link between undionly.kpxe and undionly.0 (note the name change from before) as well as ipxe.efi and ipxe.0. Then in your config file for dnsmasq you only include the base names of undionly and ipxe not with the extension. Its a quirk with version 2.75 and older that you have to accept.
Also note the i386 directory is for 32bit efi images. Those systems are not very common any more. Many of the early Apple systems were 32 bit only uefi requiring special boot kernels.
-
@george1421 Thanks for the info, so forgive my rustiness at the CLI but when I try ln -s /tftpboot/undionly.kpxe /tftpboot/undionly.0 I keep getting “ln: failed to create symbolic link ‘undionly.0’: File exists” What am I doing wrong?
-
@lof Does undionly.0 already exist?
I can tell you no matter which way I type in the ln command I always get the parameters backwards. So I’m not the best at first time right. The ln command should be
ln -s /path/to/sourcefile /path/to/symlinkso your example looks right. You might have to usesudofor your OS to create sym links if the destination sym link doesn’t already exist.
