Don't shoot buy WHY...

[ITCC]

I’ve been working with FOG for many years and am loving all the new bits

But why don’t you cut the dev time by only building for one distro. I have been using https://www.turnkeylinux.org/lampstack (Debian ) with FOG as suggested by another member.

This would also help us create manuals with more details and step by step.
using this distro build. the install notes are very small for example

• Install OS
• get SVN
  *Install FOG

But you also get SQLDB access and SSH via HTTPS, out the box. it’s a nice little solution.

[Sebastian Roth]

@ITCC Would you be willing to get a step-by-step guide for Debian ready? Would be a great starting point.

[Wayne Workman]

Imaging solutions will always have to support the network driver / kernel of the month. Always. Always. Always.

Because we I.T. folks want to immediately image the 700 brand-new computers we just purchased for half a million dollars. And we will go to whatever solution is necessary to get it done, and immediately too. Luckily, the Linux kernel is very robust in design and release frequency.

[george1421]

@Wayne-Workman said:

it’s not that big of a deal to support all the different distros…

I agree. Really the biggest part of support isn’t FOG (once we move off a trunk build environment).

The bigger support issues are beyond the reach of the fog project.

1. PXE booting (dhcp and initial iPXE image download via tftp)
2. Networking related (mainly spanning tree)
3. Target system hardware (i.e. new network driver of the month club)
4. UEFI bios inconsistencies (emerging problem child)

This issues are mainly target system environmental and not something that FOG can manage directly. I can say that with FOG 2.0 that will enter a new realm since FOG 2.0 will run inside node.js (think of how java was publicized as a cross platform operating environment) and not touch or be dependent on the OS directly. As long as the OS supports node.js then FOG will run on it. Heck node.js runs on a Raspberry Pi (I’m not suggesting that is an ideal platform for FOG, maybe some day though).

[ITCC]

I agree with both. it would be wrong of me to assume all users want to use the same version.
IF the work has been done then I wouldn’t say undo it. But picking CentOS, RHEL,Arch & Debian only would allow for less documentation writing. Don’t forget that a lot of users only install linux to use FOG. they just want step-by-step and easy access / support.

[Wayne Workman]

Let’s say 1.3.0 stable is released ONLY for Debian… and 5,000 people install it.

And then Debian developers release an update that totally breaks fog. And now FOG 1.3.0 doesn’t work for anyone and is broke everywhere the update is installed. That’d be a big issue. Supporting more than one OS solves this issue.

Right now, I think FOG supports Ubuntu, Debian, RHEL, CentOS, Fedora, Arch, and variants thereof usually.

Plus, all the work is already done. Why undo it? And also it’s not that big of a deal to support all the different distros - most changes are in the installer. PHP normally isn’t affected by changes in OS. PHP is affected by what version of PHP you have installed!

[george1421]

While I agree with the intent of your request, its not realistic to define one and only linux distribution. For example I only use RHEL enterprise based linux. I have never touched turnkey linux. Moving to Debian for me is like visiting a foreign country (like New Zealand). While we both speak english (sort of), I can’t find what I want when I need it. Its enough to drive you mad.

(this is my own personal opinion not representing anyone but me) I do agree that the FOG project needs to pick 4-6 certified distributions/versions. Because its impossible to support 31 flavors of OS’, you also pile on the number of builds per distribution that actual support numbers are staggering.