Bugs in FOG 0.33

[Fernando Gietz]

I’ve updated my svn to the ver865, in lib/redhat/config.sh (see attached files):
*php-mysql package -> php53-mysql
*clamav-update -> clamav
*freshclam configuration
[QUOTE]#where is freshclam’s config file
freshdb=“/var/clamav/”;
freshwebroot=“${webdirdest}/av/”;
freshconf=“/etc/freshclam.conf”;
freshcron=“/usr/bin/freshclam”
[/QUOTE]

This information in not mine, I see it in “install FOG on Centos” video tutorial. I don’t have merit .

Other bug:
I can’t access to the fog configuration in the web gui. I can only access to the external links.[ATTACH=full]112[/ATTACH]

[url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/0/112_Captura de pantalla de 2012-05-11 18:59:14.png?:”]Captura de pantalla de 2012-05-11 18:59:14.png[/url][url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/0/113_config.sh.txt?:”]config.sh.txt[/url]

[Blackout]

[quote=“regad, post: 3421, member: 1053”]I have downloaded and successfully installed the 862 trunk on a 12.04 lts Ubuntu. But I didn’t manage to install on a Debian6 machine;:tftpd-hpa package couldnt be installed .
Then I tried to upload an Image ( Debian6, ext4 and lvm) on my Ubuntu machine. But upload is always performed in raw mode, even I have created the image in Multiple partition Image : Single disk.[/quote]
I have just recently installed FOG on Debian. It works fine and that package is available.
[code]root@chicken:~# apt-cache show tftpd-hpa
Package: tftpd-hpa
Priority: extra
Section: net
Installed-Size: 172
Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Original-Maintainer: Debian Syslinux Maintainers syslinux@lists.debian-maintainers.org
Architecture: i386
Source: tftp-hpa
Version: 5.0-11ubuntu2.1
Depends: debconf (>= 0.5) | debconf-2.0, upstart-job, libc6 (>= 2.11), libwrap0 (>= 7.6-4~), adduser
Suggests: syslinux-common
Conflicts: atftpd, tftpd
Filename: pool/main/t/tftp-hpa/tftpd-hpa_5.0-11ubuntu2.1_i386.deb
Size: 44756
MD5sum: fa90e5d3fc0bca0520877c4741b0b138
SHA1: 10524c8d583323652fc68d9a4c992a30662feb6f
SHA256: 8420383c8a20f44e927cfa0861bae8af0e12537f37766a13fb92367728eaa0d8
Description: HPA’s tftp server
Trivial File Transfer Protocol (TFTP) is a file transfer protocol, mainly to
serve boot images over the network to other machines (PXE).
.
tftp-hpa is an enhanced version of the BSD TFTP client and server. It
possesses a number of bugfixes and enhancements over the original.
.
This package contains the server.
Homepage: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/network/tftp/
Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug
Origin: Ubuntu
Supported: 5y
[/code]

[quote=“regad, post: 3421, member: 1053”]My question is : is it already possible to upload an image ext4 format ?[/quote]
Yes

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3429, member: 907”][CODE][Fri May 11 09:02:46 2012] [error] [client ipAddressOfClient PHP Fatal error: Call to
undefined function isValidMACAddress() in /var/www/fog/service/Post_Stage2.php on
line 53
[/CODE][/quote]
Woaps, my bad, i removed this function from the old Code. I have commited it back into 867

[quote=“Fernando Gietz, post: 3432, member: 13”]Other bug:
I can’t access to the fog configuration in the web gui. I can only access to the external links.[ATTACH=full]112[/ATTACH][/quote]
The FOG Page for this section has not been created yet.

[Blackout]

I just ran a test, non resizable partition options are working. resizable is not.

I will look into this more. No doubt it’s service scripts related as im currently working on them.

[regad]

regad said: [URL=‘http://fogproject.org/forum/goto/post?id=3421#post-3421’]↑[/URL]
[INDENT]My question is : is it already possible to upload an image ext4 format ?[/INDENT]
Blackout : Yes

OK , Thank you, I will try monday ( saturday and Sunday are days off).
Maybe there is a problem because we use Logical volume manager.

[Blackout]

I’ve found some problems with NTFS resizing - the cylinder boundary issues with new versions of fdisk etc

I’ll have something committed today to fix these problems.

[Blackout]

871

• Boot image: NTFS Resize: Windows XP: Upload: Partition start sector is now detected and used when recreating the partition for resize - throws error if not 63
• Boot image: NTFS Resize: Windows XP: Download: Sets start sector to 63 (same as xp.mbr) - new tools use 2048 for sector alignment, but this will corrupt images made with a start sector of 63
• Boot image: Maybe sleeps reduced
• Boot image: Some outputs made consistent
• PHP Strict warning updates
• Service script updates
• All of these updates should make non-resize imaging work as intended. Resizeable windows xp should work, vista and 7 are untested

[astrouga]

Just installed 871 on a clean ubuntu machine. All of the webpage content below the title on an page is blank. For example, on the main page, I see the icons and the title “Dashboard”, but there is nothing below the “Dashboard”. Similarly, if I click on the “Image Management” icon, I see “Image Management” and a menu on the left with “New Search, List All Images, New Image”, but if I click on “New Image” I just see the same page. It does not load the content below “Image Management”.

Effectively I can’t do anything.

[Blackout]

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3458, member: 907”]Just installed 871 on a clean ubuntu machine. All of the webpage content below the title on an page is blank. For example, on the main page, I see the icons and the title “Dashboard”, but there is nothing below the “Dashboard”. Similarly, if I click on the “Image Management” icon, I see “Image Management” and a menu on the left with “New Search, List All Images, New Image”, but if I click on “New Image” I just see the same page. It does not load the content below “Image Management”.

Effectively I can’t do anything.[/quote]
Check /var/log/apache2/error.log

Any PHP errors being reported?

[astrouga]

Sorry, yes I get the same error each time I click on a link:

[Tue May 15 10:08:03 2012] [error] [client hiddingMyIP] PHP Warning: call_user_method_array() expects exactly 3 parameters, 2 given in /var/www/fog/lib/fog/FOGPageManager.class.php on line 133, referer: [url]http://hiddingMyIP/fog/management/index.php?node=host[/url]

(of course the referrer portion changes depending on the link I try)

If you look at line 133 of /var/www/fog/lib/fog/FOGPageManger.class.php, I see:
call_user_method_array($method, $class);

I fixed it by changing the line to:
call_user_method_array($method, $class,array($args));

Now the pages are displaying properly.

–astrouga

BTW, this function is deprecated as of PHP 4.1.0.

[BryceZ]

I just pulled the latest SVN and was able to confirm the blank loading. With display_errors = On in php.ini:
[CODE]Warning: call_user_method_array() expects exactly 3 parameters, 2 given in /var/www/fog/lib/fog/FOGPageManager.class.php on line 133 [/CODE]
Loads directly below the Dashboard header.

[astrouga]

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3489, member: 907”]

I fixed it by changing the line to:
call_user_method_array($method, $class,array($args));
Now the pages are displaying properly.
[/QUOTE]

After the change above, I only had one issue more issue. It is possible that others won’t experience it, but I’ll mention it anyway. The first host I added got an hostID=0 in the hosts table. Every time I tried to do anything Fog spit back an error about the ID being “0”. I wasn’t able to add any more hosts or upload/download an image until I manually changed the ID to “1” in the hosts table. Then everything worked.

Imaging of a Windows 7 disk “multiple partition image - single disk (not resizeable)” worked like a charm. I imaged a Dell Latitude D830. Image uploaded fine, client rebooted properly, task was removed. Download was fine, client rebooted, task removed. Also, for some reason, all of the speed issues I was encountering disappeared. Everything worked better than it ever has in our environment. I’ll have to test a desktop or two and see if everything is OK.

This is real progress. Thanks for the work.

–astrouga

[Blackout]

While testing 0.33 you should have the following in your ‘php.ini’

error_reporting = E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE & ~E_DEPRECATED
display_errors = On

I have fixed the call_user_method_array() issue.

872

• FOGPageManager: render(): Replaced deprecated call_user_method_array() call with call_user_func() - dropped argument pass as PHP Strict was throwing errors if the FOGPage class did not expect the $argument - $this->arguments is accessible in FOGPageManager but should not be required
• schemaupdater: Fixed wrong field type on Task State name field - this fixes ‘state’ icons no showing correctly - need to write a better schema updater to sync my dev server with svn

[Blackout]

@astrouga

I looked into the ID issue but i could not replicate it. I tested emptying my Hosts table and creating a new host via the GUI.
This worked as intended giving the first host an ID of 1. I have no tested this on a fresh install, but it did work as intended as of ~860

How did you add the host? Via the GUI or another means?

Great to hear it’s all working well. The latest tools provide a good performance boost by properly aligning drive sectors.

Windows XP has some issues with the aligning etc as it’s installer still uses start sector 63.

If someone could test an NTFS re sizable image for Windows 7 that would help a lot.

[astrouga]

[quote=“Blackout, post: 3538, member: 1”]@astrouga

I looked into the ID issue but i could not replicate it. I tested emptying my Hosts table and creating a new host via the GUI.
This worked as intended giving the first host an ID of 1. I have no tested this on a fresh install, but it did work as intended as of ~860

How did you add the host? Via the GUI or another means?
[/quote]
I used the gui. It was strange because I added a host, then pulled an image from the host to the server. When I went to add another host, it over-wrote my first host. I didn’t realize this at first, but this is when I started seeing the ID issue. I’ll load 872 and see if I can reproduce.

[quote]
If someone could test an NTFS re sizable image for Windows 7 that would help a lot.[/quote]

I’ll give this a go too. I tried it on 871, and the imaging process seemed to work, but the host I downloaded the image to did not boot. I’ll pay closer attention on the next test.

-astrouga

[astrouga]

Blackout:

Can you give us your recommended setting for a Windows 7 image? Specifically, for testing purposes, should I keep the 100MB Windows partition on my Windows 7 images and set OS to “windows 7”? If I don’t keep the 100MB partition, do I need to change the OS setting for the host to “vista”? I hadn’t heard this before, but it was mentioned here:

[url]http://fogproject.org/forum/threads/windows-7-no-100mb-partition.670/[/url]

I’d just like to make sure that we are on the same page so that my feedback is useful to you.

Thanks,

–astrouga

[astrouga]

Just did a clean install of trunk 872 on Ubuntu 12.04.

During the initial “Database Scheme Installer/Updater” you have one syntax error. It produces this error:

"The following errors occured

Update ID: 32 - 1
Database Error:
Column count doesn’t match value count at row 1
Database SQL:

INSERT INTO fog.taskStates (tsID, tsName, tsDescription) VALUES
(1, ‘Queued’, ‘Task has been created and FOG is waiting for the Host to check-in.’, ‘1’),
(2, ‘In-Progress’, ‘Host is currently Imaging.’, ‘2’),
(3, ‘Complete’, ‘Imaging has been completed.’, ‘3’);
"

You left off the tsOrder column name in your INSERT statement. It should be “INSERT INTO fog.taskStates (tsID, tsName, tsDescription,tsOrder)…”

I didn’t have any issues with the hostID this time.

Windows 7 64-bit (with the 100 MB system partition) imaged just fine on a Dell Optiplex 745 using the “Multiple Partition Image - Single Disk (Not Resizable)” option. I don’t ever use the single partition option, but I tried it. I imaged the same config as a “Single Parition (NTFS, Resizable)” and got a “Windows Boot Manager” screen when I download the image. A repair did not work.

–astrouga

[Blackout]

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3543, member: 907”]Can you give us your recommended setting for a Windows 7 image? Specifically, for testing purposes[/quote]
If set to Multi-partition, it does not matter if there is 1 or 2 partitions.

For NTFS Resizable there are checks made to determine the amount of partitions, meaning both should work.

In saying this, both will need to be tested. Personally i use 1 partition

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3557, member: 907”]Windows 7 64-bit (with the 100 MB system partition) imaged just fine on a Dell Optiplex 745 using the “Multiple Partition Image - Single Disk (Not Resizable)” option. I don’t ever use the single partition option, but I tried it. I imaged the same config as a “Single Parition (NTFS, Resizable)” and got a “Windows Boot Manager” screen when I download the image. A repair did not work.[/quote]

There are NTFS resizable deploy issues to sort out still.

Could you please test if Windows 7 works after you have Uploaded an image? (dont deploy, does it boot after uploading?)

There is resizing performed before and after the image is uploaded, knowing if the OS is still boot able means that resizing is working correctly and i have a bug in the deploy some where.

Thanks for the reporting, keep them coming! The less testing i have to do, the more development i can do

Some times i wish there was a “Microsoft frequent installer rewards program”

[astrouga]

[quote=“Blackout, post: 3567, member: 1”]
In saying this, both will need to be tested. Personally i use 1 partition
[/quote]

I go with 1 usually too, good to know that both are supported, as there seemed to be some confusion. Thanks for responding to that thread.

[quote]
Could you please test if Windows 7 works after you have Uploaded an image? (dont deploy, does it boot after uploading?)
[/quote]
I am sure that the machine I uploaded my image from did indeed reboot properly after the image was uploaded. I did it several times while I was testing different systems. I’ll double-check it first thing in the morning though.

[quote]
Thanks for the reporting, keep them coming! The less testing i have to do, the more development i can do
Some times i wish there was a “Microsoft frequent installer rewards program” :D[/quote]

I’m just glad to be helping out. The specific requests are helpful – I am learning a quite a bit about the imaging process as I go along, so it is useful stuff.

Cheers,
–astrouga

[astrouga]

trunk 873…I ran two tests with the Single Partition (NTFS Only, Resizable) image type.

A Windows 7 host with two partitions (100 MB system and OS) seemed to work fine. Both partitions were recognized, the image uploaded and the host rebooted fine.
A Windows 7 with one partition (didn’t have the 100 MB boot partition) did not work. The process completed, but the image upload process (blue screen that shows progress status) took less than 2 seconds. The image file on the server is about 500 KB. The client did reboot successfully though.

A minor bug to note: I noticed that the task status icon that shows up on the Task Management screen does not change during an image upload. It always shows “queued” even on multiple refreshes of the page. However, the status does change and appears to be correct for image downloads.

–astrouga

[Blackout]

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3578, member: 907”]A Windows 7 with one partition (didn’t have the 100 MB boot partition) did not work. The process completed, but the image upload process (blue screen that shows progress status) took less than 2 seconds. The image file on the server is about 500 KB. The client did reboot successfully though.[/quote]

Could you please verify that this wasnt a file system issue by running chkdsk a few times and trying the single partition upload. I havent changed any of the Windows 7 code, so there shouldnt be any issues if 2 partition works.

[quote=“astrouga, post: 3578, member: 907”]A minor bug to note: I noticed that the task status icon that shows up on the Task Management screen does not change during an image upload. It always shows “queued” even on multiple refreshes of the page. However, the status does change and appears to be correct for image downloads.[/quote]

I will change this so the status update. In previous versions, upload tasks never checked; they never done anything really. I think this was done so upload tasks didnt take up a slot, but i have other ways around that now. (i.e. excluding upload tasks from getActiveTasks())