Topics created by Wayne Workman

The figures seem much more stable now, much less fluctuations. Thank you @Quazz !

@Wayne-Workman said in Popularity Contest: I suggest we look at both locations and send the one from the file with a newer timestamp. While that would surely work I would really like to untangle this convoluted solution now and for ever. The more I think about it the less I want to add more if then else, check this, link here, try again, whatever. Let’s discuss the details in a new topic. Please leave the reporting script as it is right now. It’s really good you added it this way so we got notice of this.

I am totally geeking out hearing this! The film technology they used is also quite fascinating.

@EduardoTSeoane It will be interesting to see how optimization works for you. With the size of your campus we may need to split the database from the FOG server to give the sql database more CPU time. We need feedback from large campuses like you have to help with performance tuning of FOG.

@Quazz Not sure from the top of my head. Thanks for finding this!! I will take a look later on.

@Wayne-Workman Sorry this has been without attention for a long time! Not only this topic but all the others: https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/11868/how-to-change-colors-on-bandwidth-graph https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/11999/bandwidth-line-colours https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/6912/can-i-change-the-colors-of-the-tx-rx-graph I played with the things mentioned in the other topics and figured that it seems to pick colors just by itself if we don’t force it to use our colors. When I remove the color scheme as described I get the following picture: Please vote if you find this appropriate. Sure the more nodes you have the less obvious distinct colors there are. But from it’s still better than using a successive shade of whatever color you start from. I’ve tested this in three different browsers on a Linux machine. I would imagine this working nicely on Windows and Mac OS browsers as well. What do you think @Tom-Elliott?

I rebuilt my master and slave from scratch. Everything worked as expected, this topic can be resolved.

Just close it. Maybe I’ll put together a Galera tutorial one of these days for FOG.

I made the changes and did a test run, dev-branch completely passed.

@Wayne-Workman Probably one of the configs were changed and the updater is asking what to do. The best I could find quickly is: https://serverfault.com/questions/259226/automatically-keep-current-version-of-config-files-when-apt-get-install/593640 Try: apt-get update;DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get dist-upgrade -y -o Dpkg::Options::="--force-confdef" -o Dpkg::Options::="--force-confold" --force-yes What a monster of a command…

Thanks to Wayne I had access to the RHEL 7 machine for a quick test and seems like we hit it with the latest fix. Installer went through like a charm. So RHEL is back in the race I suppose.

@Wayne-Workman Ahhh, now I see. Looking at the certificate on the website I see that there was a new one issued not long ago. Certificate date begins at 08.05.2018! Just wondering why I don’t run into the same issue. Maybe your git is keeping some kind of certificate cache?

Removed. Well, kept the surface-pro-4 matching element, but just removed the 7156 portion.