• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. michelsantana
    M
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 5
    • Posts 31
    • Best 2
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    michelsantana

    @michelsantana

    2
    Reputation
    429
    Profile views
    31
    Posts
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online

    michelsantana Unfollow Follow

    Best posts made by michelsantana

    • RE: 1.3.5 RC13 Error in Fog script when attempting to expand partitions

      @Frank

      Seems that the problem come from the script that call the function procsfdisk. In the definition (procsfdisk.awk) you can find:

      # This is where it all begins (See->BEGIN) :)
      BEGIN {
          # Arguments - Use "-v var=val" when calling this script
          # CHUNK_SIZE;
          # MIN_START;
      

      And in the script partition-funcs.sh, in the same directory, you can find that the call to the procsfdisk function:

      local awkArgs="-v SECTOR_SIZE=$sectorsize CHUNK_SIZE=$chunksize -v MIN_START=$minstart"
      
       # process with external awk script
          /usr/share/fog/lib/procsfdisk.awk $awkArgs $data
      

      And as you can see, there is a missing “-v”. Perhaps that’s the problem.

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Group delayed deployment doesn't deploy snapins

      @Tom-Elliott Applied the fix and restarted and working perfect. Thank you very much!

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana

    Latest posts made by michelsantana

    • RE: pre and post image scripts

      @george1421 said in pre and post image scripts:

      Thank you very much for your replies. I think that the complexity of implementing this kind of security measure doesn’t worth the time. Perhaps just restricting access to several subnets is more than enough.
      I will go that way.
      Thanks!

      posted in General
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: pre and post image scripts

      Thanks for your reply, Tom.
      The question is that we are moving the server from a development environment to the production network and the people in charge of security are worried about the NFS service in the Fog server, that is widely open to everyone. So, we are thinking about to make some kind of patch, using the “exportfs” command at the server side so we can just allow the NFS service to the computer that is going to be deployed (pre) and remove that permission once the deployment is done (post).

      posted in General
      M
      michelsantana
    • pre and post image scripts

      Hi,

      I’m wondering if there is any chance of executing two local scripts (at fog server) every time we deploy an image, one of them before the deployment and the other once it ends.
      The idea is to automatize some tasks that need to be done at the server side each time an image is deployed.
      Thank you!

      posted in General
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Cancelling one snapin task will cancel the whole snapin deployment job

      @Tom-Elliott Perfect! Thank you very much!

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • Cancelling one snapin task will cancel the whole snapin deployment job
      Server
      • FOG Version: 1.3.5
      • OS: CentOS7
      Client
      • Service Version:
      • OS:
      Description

      When I deploy all the snapins, the software creates one “Active Task” and as many “Active Snapins” tasks as snapins to be installed. Teorically, It’s possible to cancel the installation of one single snapin (one single task) and keep the installation of the rest of them, but when you do it, the whole job is canceled.

      Thank you!

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Problem resizing partitions on install

      @Tom-Elliott Understood 😉 I will probably do a custom report to have the information about the images and their partition layout. Thank you again!

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Problem resizing partitions on install

      @Tom-Elliott Applied the patch, captured the image from a 300GB HD and ended with this parameters:
      d1.partitions
      label: dos
      label-id: 0x849ae652
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors

      /dev/sda1 : start= 2048, size= 2921472, type=7, bootable
      /dev/sda2 : start= 2923520, size= 286721536, type=7
      /dev/sda3 : start= 289645056, size= 335495680, type=7

      d1.minimum.partitions
      label: dos
      label-id: 0x849ae652
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors

      /dev/sda1 : start= 2048, size= 60416, type=7, bootable
      /dev/sda2 : start= 2923520, size= 53114368, type=7
      /dev/sda3 : start= 289645056, size= 235008, type=7

      Then I deployed the image in debug mode to a 80GB HD. The captures of the partition process (deploy in debug mode)

      0_1490279431919_Captura de pantalla 2017-03-23 a las 14.06.55.png
      0_1490279441439_Captura de pantalla 2017-03-23 a las 14.07.23.png
      0_1490279448602_Captura de pantalla 2017-03-23 a las 14.07.42.png

      There were no errors and seems that everything is working fine. Finally I’ve got three partitions with the right proportions (338MB, 36,69GB and 42,93GB).

      Thank you very much for your help!

      P.S.
      I would be great in future releases to have information about the partition layout of the images in the “Image Management” section, and also to have the possibility of fixing the size of one partition there, without the need of editing the file d1.fixed_size_partitions

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Problem resizing partitions on install

      @Tom-Elliott That is exactly what happens. Now I’m trying to deploy the whole image into the computer with 80GB disk fixing the size of the second partition and then resize the partitions and capture again from that computer. That should guarantee that this deployment will work in disks of at least 80GB and above.
      I will post the results.

      Thank you

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Problem resizing partitions on install

      @Tom-Elliott Exactly. Partclone starts and deploy the first partition, but when it tries to deploy the second, throws the error.

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana
    • RE: Problem resizing partitions on install

      In order to clarify if it’s a normal behaviour or a bug, I have repartitioned and checked the partition schema and sizes of the partitions.
      The starting point is a computer with a 298GB HD with three primary partitions:
      sda1: NTFS, System Reserved. Size: 1,38GB
      sda2: NTFS, Boot. Size: 30,11GB with 3,74GB free space
      sda3: NTFS. Size: 266,59GB with 266,43GB free space

      After doing a “sysprep”, I captured the HD with fog and this are the content of the config files in the image directory:
      d1.partitions
      label: dos
      label-id: 0x849ae652
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors

      /dev/sda1 : start= 2048, size= 2921472, type=7, bootable
      /dev/sda2 : start= 2923520, size= 63135760, type=7
      /dev/sda3 : start= 66059280, size= 559078065, type=7

      d1.minimum.partitions
      label: dos
      label-id: 0x849ae652
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors

      /dev/sda1 : start= 2048, size= 60416, type=7, bootable
      /dev/sda2 : start= 2923520, size= 52801536, type=7
      /dev/sda3 : start= 66059280, size= 261120, type=7

      When I try to restore this image into a computer with a smaller HD (80GB) that should be enough to fit the three partitions, it gives me the same error.

      I made the deployment as a debug task and using the “ismajordebug=1” kernel argument. Here are the screen captures:
      0_1490200550838_20170322_163036.jpg

      0_1490200628535_20170322_163105.jpg

      0_1490200638049_20170322_163129.jpg

      0_1490200646766_20170322_163203.jpg

      I hope this helps to clarify what is happening. Let me know if you need more tests.

      Thank you very much

      posted in Bug Reports
      M
      michelsantana