Navigation

    FOG Project

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    1. Home
    2. bengillam
    B
    • Profile
    • Following
    • Followers
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Best
    • Groups

    bengillam

    @bengillam

    0
    Reputation
    23
    Posts
    394
    Profile views
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online

    bengillam Follow

    Best posts made by bengillam

    This user hasn't posted anything yet.

    Latest posts made by bengillam

    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      @Tom-Elliott said:

      I’m fairly sure we do attempt initializing the disk, but the basis of the fogpartinfo (which I would still love to find a more suitable method to get partition names), is likely breaking things right now.

      so im a little confused, so the error im getting is a bug? In which case 1) is it safe to ignore if my resultant imaged pcs are booting, and 2) is there a more stable build you could recommend? (other than the much older 1.2.0 version)

      Thanks
      Ben

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      @Sebastian-Roth said:

      @bengillam said:

      EBR Signature for logical partition invalid

      See fractal13’s post here: https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/2848/ebr-signature-for-logical-partition-invalid/2
      Probably same in your case, trying to deploy to an completely empty disk, hmm?

      Hi yes, in this case had 5 machines supplied to us refurb with blank disks which I need to image. With my latest test finishing and booting don’t I need to worry?

      Can certainly test with a machine with non empty disk.

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      @bengillam said:

      OK slightly embarrassingly may have spotted the issue, a stray 5800 hp which physically looks identical was in the pile of fresh machines i decided to image expecting it to be a 7800 would probably not help! Have now got an actual 7800 which I am trying to image.

      Also moved to svn build 4103 after reading some good things.

      Running the image operation as we speak, will see if this works and post back.

      Thanks

      Ben

      ok that didnt work same issue with the EBR signature - however the image now completes and DOES boot (since 4103 upgrade). Is it safe to ignore the error or is there something deeper causing it.

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      OK slightly embarrassingly may have spotted the issue, a stray 5800 hp which physically looks identical was in the pile of fresh machines i decided to image expecting it to be a 7800 would probably not help! Have now got an actual 7800 which I am trying to image.

      Also moved to svn build 4103 after reading some good things.

      Running the image operation as we speak, will see if this works and post back.

      Thanks

      Ben

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      @ch3i said:

      @bengillam Hi, I’ve that problem on a linux image since few month. I’ve to upload the image in debug mode and run that before imaging :

      fsck.ext4 /dev/your_linux_partition
      

      hi,

      thanks so I need to run whole of the upload debug operation here -> https://wiki.fogproject.org/wiki/index.php/Debug_Mode
      if so at what point should I run your command above.

      Thanks

      Ben

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      Hi sorry for confusion.

      Story follows as

      1. My original box was 3036 - working stable for some time, developed an error complaining about mounting nfs and checking for .mntcheck files - tried the sugggested fixes of touching the files but no luck. So decided to take a fresh box and make another fog server.

      2. installed xubuntu 14.04.3 as stated above as host os. Installed latest svn on friday. Install died at dhcp setup. Figured it was a broken build so wiped my machine back to fresh manually and updated.

      3. Tried with an older build 3559 - This installs absolutely fine. Created an image , added a host and performed an upload all with no errors.

      4. Try to deploy and get

      Erasing current MBR/GPT Tables… EBR Signature for logical partition invalid: Read: 0x000, but should be 0xAA55. Error reading logical Partitions, list may be truncated.

      Hope that makes a little more sense.

      I could I suppose try going back to 3036 though this build didnt move fresh images from the dev folder to their correct folder. Whilst not a deal breaker was a bit annoying.

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • Most recent stable build worth using or fix for this error?

      Hey all, had fog running fine for a while and it decided to fall over and started giving me strange NFS errors. Spent forever trying to find source of problem and decided it wasnt worth wasting time and the build was fairly old at that point.

      Decided to just build a new box however having issues here.

      Latest build from SVN fails to install and dies at setting up and starting dhcp. So thought i would look for an older build and read a few bits and pages rtalking about r3559 have installed this and it seems to install fine and take an image and reboot as expected, however on trying to put the image back down to a pc i am getting

      Erasing current MBR/GPT Tables… EBR Signature for logical partition invalid: Read: 0x000, but should be 0xAA55. Error reading logical Partitions, list may be truncated.

      Then it reboots itself a few moments later and drops me at a grub rescue prompt.

      Server machine is an AMD Athlon X2 (if that makes a difference) 4gb ram, running xubuntu 14.04.3 and build 3559 of fog.

      Client is a HP 7800 SFF PC.

      Image taken from reference 7800 SFF and running Xubuntu 14.04.3

      Settings for image are

      OS: Linux
      Image Type Single Disk Resizable
      Partition: Everything
      Compression :9

      Same settings as ive been using for a while without issues.

      Not sure if its just a dodgy build or me?

      Either way not sure if this is an easy fix or If there is a better build I can use.

      Not too bothered about being bleeding edge but something relatively stable. The official stable release has issues with Vista resizable images so not usable for some of our images.

      Any help much appreciated.

      Thanks

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Exec Format Error 2e008001

      sorry thought image had come through, it was 1 could not select and 2 could not boot errors both with same error code and a link to ipxe website.

      multitude of updates and re-installs didnt help, have just wiped and started again and starting with nearest working version i last had which was 2996 and work up from there

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • Exec Format Error 2e008001

      Hi All,

      Decided to go back onto Xubuntu after Centos was giving me problems. All installed again, vsvn 3036 as recently suggested by tom (and which indeed did work on centos install).

      Am able to boot to the fog menu, but when I try to register and then this error throws up.

      [IMG]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/P58u_JCmWNgR0bHwbcgGcyg9kEVfTV47w-8CdnuwcRxFZpByXUmBCQGVdU7deRAK99AE02flfXE-DBhdfpO0RL62LJxj1Vuq=w1896-h792[/IMG]

      saw some suggested corrupted ipxe, have tried re-install of fog but same happens.

      Running svn 3036, on Xubuntu 14.04 LTS

      Any ideas?

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam
    • RE: Tasks do not start

      will have a read of that now, so i tried my theory of configure fog with dhcp then kill the service and it behaves much the same.
      started again and removed from my production network and it seems to work, so whatever it is its not handling what the dhcp server on my draytek is handing out, though also doesn’t explain why a tftp test from a client machine got rejected as well. Will play around a bit more and try and try and pin down cause. Im not wrong in thinking its just 66/67 i need? Also presume i dont need anything silly like a . at end of the ip for tftp server like DNS on a domain name ?

      posted in FOG Problems
      B
      bengillam