@sebastian-roth
Yes, and yes.
Posts made by Wayne Workman
-
RE: FOG External Reporting
Look at that, Raspbian and Red Hat are in the list now. Also, 359 dev installations/upgrades since we started tracking.
Somewhere around 85 systems are very closely tracking the latestdev
branch, with many others tracking a bit less closely. -
RE: FOG External Reporting
@Tom-Elliott I took an easier route. The intent of your request was to see the exact values. So I added a JSON text object to the solution.
There is a link for downloading the current JSON data on the dashboard now. Though you can go directly to it using this link: https://fog-external-reporting-results.theworkmans.us/external_reporting.json
This is the PR that accomplished this if you were curious. https://github.com/FOGProject/fog-community-scripts/pull/70
-
RE: FOG External Reporting
@Tom-Elliott it’s likely possible to do.
The graphs use Python’s pyplot module. Here is the exact spot in the script for the OS Versions graph:
https://github.com/FOGProject/fog-community-scripts/blob/c527036bc4623f7f6225a48c545d37edc269d112/external_reporting/external_reporting/do_web_tasks.py#L88I’ll see if I can add some numbers.
-
RE: FOG External Reporting
327 dev installations out there now, at least. Not a single one is Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Which, I suppose makes sense. If you’re paying to use RHEL, you’re probably in a business setting and wouldn’t install from a developer branch because you want something stable.
Also notably there are zero Arch dev systems out there since we started tracking. This is a bigger point as I can’t think of a reason why an Arch Linux user wouldn’t dive into fog dev branch.
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
@astrugatch I haven’t done anything on this yet.
@moderators would there be any issue with using a forums topic to host torrent files for a fog VM image?
-
RE: Ubuntu 16.04 installer observation
That looks to be the case. Just a fluke. Today, it installed fine.
-
Ubuntu 16.04 installer observation
I noticed today that Ubuntu 16.04 failed it’s installation test on the
dev-branch
. This is unusual for Ubuntu. Normally, Ubuntu passes it’s installation tests.Attached are the logs from the run.
2021-03-01_12-33-PM_output.log
2021-03-01_12-33-PM_fog_error.log
2021-03-01_12-33-PM_apache.log -
RE: Fog for Dev - Save each capture in its own folder automatically.
@cyannella said in Fog for Dev - Save each capture in its own folder automatically.:
How do I launch rsync myself with the parameters after FOG captures the device image?
Research about FOG’s post download scripts. This should get you started: https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/7740/the-magical-mystical-fog-post-download-scriptYou could also hook into web calls for when the image capture reports it is complete. Could do a one-liner exec statement in the php, and any number of more-fancy things.
Maybe the solution is simpler. maybe a clever bash script that runs within cron to do what you want with recent images. There is a DB with all the capture dates in it after all… python could do this too.
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
Reviving this thread on my lunch break. What would a docker container for FOG look like?
Immediate thoughts:
- specify via environment variables database configuration for some external DB.
- Specify via environment variables the other things found in
/opt/fog/.fogsettings
too. - disk mounting for images.
For the VM image, I could probably get this going in a couple weekends. In my VM environment at home, I can create qcow2 disk types. Though I can convert
qcow2
tovmdk
rather easily. Could make aqcow2
as well asvmdk
torrents individually for distribution. -
RE: Small errors in migration commands
I’ve added some more steps that should avoid those errors.
I’ve updated the
chown
command in the wiki. The userfogproject
is something that came about after this article was written. The user used to be justfog
-
RE: Fedora 33 and Ubuntu 16
@george1421 said in Fedora 33 and Ubuntu 16:
I think there is surely a value in creating a supported operating system list for the FOG project.
Agreed. Though @Tom-Elliott wants to get everything OS agnostic by replacing PHP components with NodeJS ones, getting the UI and API away from making native OS calls, so on.
It’s a good plan, but a ton of work and probably years away. In the mean time, we could limit scope of the installer script by choosing a handful of OSs.
-
Fedora 33 and Ubuntu 16
I’m having a lot of problems integrating Fedora 33 into the daily tests. This has been the reason for the lapse in testing here this last month.
I use Debian 10 as a bastion host, and use SSH Proxy Jump through Debian 10 to get to the other OSs. This has worked with every other OS that I’ve added. The Terraform configuration for Fedora 33 is here.
It’s not working for Fedora 33. I’ve gone over this issue probably a dozen times. Manual tests of this functionality work fine, so I’m unable to reproduce the problem. At this point, I need to leave Fedora 33 behind as there is value being lost in not testing the other more-popular OSs.
Good news is I’ve added Ubuntu 16 to the daily tests. This is because it’s still quite popular among
dev-branch
users.Ubuntu 16.04 End-Of-Life is April 30, 2021. I suggest on this date the FOG Project drop support for Ubuntu 16.04 entirely. I urge the community currently using Ubuntu 16.04 to move to something newer.
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
I’m also down with making a Ubuntu image. Since that seems to be most popular. I wouldn’t want to mess with more than one.
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
A docker container is a good idea.
I was thinking with a VM image using Debian, I could pull down the packages FOG needs locally, and set apt-get to use those local packages. All the packages would also be pre-installed in the image.
As far as running something first-boot, if I’m building it I wouldn’t set it up like that. I’d say the admin can log into the VM (however they do that), and just run the fog installer which would already be there for them.
With this approach, there’s no changes to the installer or the code base. I hoped to automate building this image, creating a new one with each FOG release, and distributing via torrent.
If admins want to update, they would need internet and comment/uncomment some lines in their
sources.list
file, and update the fog repo withgit pull
.Because the OS would be a chosen one, I can write up some documentation on setting a static IP, as well as putting a readme in the image saying the same.
Though a docker image is good too. idk if it would be easier or not. I don’t know docker very well.
-
RE: Upgrade FOG without internet connection
It is probably really wasteful for nothing more than a FOG server, but you can mirror RPM repos really easily and host them locally for systems to access. I’ve done this before. I can say I had more problem’s with RHEL’s repos than any other. Sometimes packages there would simply be missing. Never had this issue with CentOS or Ubuntu repositories (which I’ve also mirrored and hosted locally).
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
Yeah, at this point Fedora would be a better pick for RPM based Linux than CentOS.
I think people should learn Debian. It’s not that big of a jump. The more you know about Linux, the less the distro matters. Tons of stuff online about Debian that you can search for any need you have. Main difference is apt-get vs dnf vs yum.
How to install git on CentOS:
yum -y install gitHow to install git on Debian:
apt-get -y install gitSo much difference…
The community likes Ubuntu a lot. I’m assuming most of these are probably from Europe, as Linux is popular there and there’s a decent FOG following in Europe. I would not choose Ubuntu for a server OS simply because of the automatic update stuff it does by default. At every company I’ve ever worked at, patches are a very, very controlled event. Down to the day, when it starts, when it ends, what’s being applied. We’d never put a server on cruise control.
Back to topic: An appliance based on Debian is a good idea. The build process should be automated, I can help with this. I have a decent internet connection at my house. I can distribute the image as a torrent (wouldn’t be very big). Others can help host if they choose due to the nature of the torrent system.
-
RE: Simplifying Deployment with Official Virtual Appliance
Someone out there has already installed FOG on CentOS Stream. I guess they know what they are doing, as I’ve not tested it at all.
Just today, I noticed a Ubuntu 14.04 user!!