Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Hey Thomas Am 2014-11-13 um 10:57 schrieb Moritz Struebe: conf/sources.list I was hoping to fix this using classes. conf/sources.list/jessie conf/sources.list/wheezy conf/sources.list/squeeze conf/sources.list/trusty Based on our phone call yesterday I looked into this and I'm afraid we will have to go with /etc/os-release Using $ID_$VERSION_ID will leave us with ubuntu_14.04 and debian_7 etc. But I think that's sill better than doing adjustments during the package-build as it makes cross-building very simple. Morty -- Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Strübe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme) Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Martensstr. 1 91058 Erlangen Tel : +49 9131 85-25419 Fax : +49 9131 85-28732 eMail : stru...@cs.fau.de WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
dracut in ubuntu (Was: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support)
Am 2014-11-17 um 09:12 schrieb Thomas Lange: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:49:30 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@cs.fau.de said: What it recent? http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=dracutsearchon=namessuite=allsection=all 0.40+1-1 is currently available in Debian. https://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dracut.html Hmm, but only in testing. And vivid is there, too: https://launchpad.net/dracut So, for Ubuntu I see two options. Add a ppa or contact Harald Hoyer [1]. But's that's probably something you should do. Morty [1] https://launchpad.net/~harald-redhat -- Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Strübe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme) Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Martensstr. 1 91058 Erlangen Tel : +49 9131 85-25419 Fax : +49 9131 85-28732 eMail : stru...@cs.fau.de WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: dracut in ubuntu (Was: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support)
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 10:13:51 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@cs.fau.de said: Hmm, but only in testing. And vivid is there, too: https://launchpad.net/dracut So, for Ubuntu I see two options. Add a ppa or contact Harald Hoyer [1]. But's that's probably something you should do. I would guess, that 040+1-1 would make it automatically into Ubuntu vivid, but I'm not sure how this works in Ubuntu. -- regards Thomas
RE: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 10:16:30 +0100, Moritz Struebe Moritz.Struebe at informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: * Improve the example configuration I see two ways of doing this. First make a second example Ubuntu or just add all the necessary changes in comments. As one should look through the configuration anyway this might be the solution that is easiest to maintain. We already have a package_config/UBUNTU in FAI. Is this not sufficient? Sure the repository URLs are different for Ubuntu, but this should be done in the FAI package for Ubuntu. Yes, your are right. I was thinking this through while reading [4] and somehow my brain went down the wrong road - our own config, which I inherited, is too far away from that example Just to chime in... I think Moritz' proposal on getting current FAI packages into the Ubuntu repositories is a great idea. FAI is a nightmare to configure on Ubuntu, there are so many quirks and pitfalls there and the documentation required to get it running is spread widely. A working out-of-the-box solution would be such an improvement for everyone. In the Wiki page [4] you mentioned I tried to stick as closely as possible to the stock FAI configuration. All changes from the stock FAI configuration are documented cleanly with appropriate classes wherever possible. This eases transition and future upgrades. In fact, I'm using FAI since quite a few years now over multiple upgrades and this system has proven to be robust and scalable. I'd recommend this path for the Ubuntu FAI packages as well in order to facilitate upgrades for the maintainer on one hand and make it easier for the users to work with this package on the other hand - keeping closely in sync with the official documentation, examples on the Wiki and the mailing lists. Introducing a whole new configuration just for Ubuntu would somewhat 'break' this compatibility. What else would be great would be a Ubuntu-specific readme in the fai-server packages that gives a quick step-by-step-guide on how to get everything up and running (take 'fai-setup -vl' as an example). Cheers, Robert [4] http://wiki.fai-project.org/wiki/Installing_Ubuntu_Linux_with_FAI
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Hey. Am 2014-11-13 um 09:59 schrieb Robert Markula: In the Wiki page [4] you mentioned I tried to stick as closely as possible to the stock FAI configuration. All changes from the stock FAI configuration are documented cleanly with appropriate classes wherever possible. This eases transition and future upgrades. The problem with that page that I see is that the _changes_ are actually not documented. It's rather a replace the contents of file X with Y. A replace line X with Y or remove XY, would IMO be more helpful. In fact, I'm using FAI since quite a few years now over multiple upgrades and this system has proven to be robust and scalable. Actually this is because the config was kept quite stable. I'd recommend this path for the Ubuntu FAI packages as well in order to facilitate upgrades for the maintainer on one hand and make it easier for the users to work with this package on the other hand - keeping closely in sync with the official documentation, examples on the Wiki and the mailing lists. Introducing a whole new configuration just for Ubuntu would somewhat 'break' this compatibility. I strongly disagree. As I already said, it's currently a replace X with Z. This could be simplified with copy example_ubuntu to . And I'm not suggesting anything that isn't already there - at least in some way. What else would be great would be a Ubuntu-specific readme in the fai-server packages that gives a quick step-by-step-guide on how to get everything up and running (take 'fai-setup -vl' as an example). Ideally there shouldn't be any difference Morty -- Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Struebe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme) Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Martensstr. 1 91058 Erlangen Tel : +49 9131 85-25419 Fax : +49 9131 85-28732 eMail : stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Quoting Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de: Am 2014-11-13 um 09:59 schrieb Robert Markula: In the Wiki page [4] you mentioned I tried to stick as closely as possible to the stock FAI configuration. All changes from the stock FAI configuration are documented cleanly with appropriate classes wherever possible. This eases transition and future upgrades. The problem with that page that I see is that the _changes_ are actually not documented. It's rather a replace the contents of file X with Y. A replace line X with Y or remove XY, would IMO be more helpful. Correct. Upon writing the Wiki page I initially had done exactly what you proposed - replace line X with Y. The result was that it made the wiki page awefully cumbersome to read. So I did stick with the current schema which focuses on getting things done quickly so the reader can mainly use copy and paste. But my proposal was not about the writing of a wiki page, but on how the FAI config space could be modified. And there you can see that no existing classes are modified or even touched, instead additional classes, namely 'UBUNTU' and 'OS_UBUNTU_1404_AMD64' are introduced to cleanly separate the Ubuntu-specific changes. The modification of the fai config files like '/etc/fai/fai.conf' is a different pair of shoes actually. But even this should stick as closely to the original as possible - and upon preparing the wiki it took me quite some time to find a solution which minimized the impact of the changes on the default config as much as possible. In fact, I'm using FAI since quite a few years now over multiple upgrades and this system has proven to be robust and scalable. Actually this is because the config was kept quite stable. Yes and no. On one hand, the FAI config *did* change over the years, and on the other hand Ubuntu as a distribution changed as well - the required configuration changes in order to make a specific Ubuntu release work did change with almost every Ubuntu release. I'd recommend this path for the Ubuntu FAI packages as well in order to facilitate upgrades for the maintainer on one hand and make it easier for the users to work with this package on the other hand - keeping closely in sync with the official documentation, examples on the Wiki and the mailing lists. Introducing a whole new configuration just for Ubuntu would somewhat 'break' this compatibility. I strongly disagree. As I already said, it's currently a replace X with Z. This could be simplified with copy example_ubuntu to . And I'm not suggesting anything that isn't already there - at least in some way. I strongly disagree to your disagreement :-) And I disagree to your proposal to create a completely separate example_ubuntu config for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post. Why not use the existing configuration and just add the Ubuntu-specific changes in a non-intrusive way? Using classes is a very elegant way to do this. This could even be included in the default FAI config examples from Thomas without any harm. What else would be great would be a Ubuntu-specific readme in the fai-server packages that gives a quick step-by-step-guide on how to get everything up and running (take 'fai-setup -vl' as an example). Ideally there shouldn't be any difference Absolutely! E.g. things would be much easier if dracut was supported on Ubuntu. But that's just a matter of time IMO. And that brings me back to my initial statement: Keeping as close as possible to the stock FAI configuration would make the switch to dracut a breeze - just remove the Ubuntu-specific initramfs-related changes and you're set. Reading your comments from other posts I get the impression that we intend the same things but just name them differently. Cheers, Robert
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 10:16:30 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: I think we can take care of almost all issues at packaging time as described in [3]. Nice link. I didn't know that this was possible. What are the current diffs in the packaging files for Ubuntu? The only real adjustments required by the PPA are adding the PPA's URL and it's key to config and nfsroot. IMO this will be only a few lines of diffs. How do you like to handle those diffs in git? I love to see an up-to-date FAI release for every Ubuntu LTS, maybe for every release. I prefer having this in universe instead of a PPA. But maybe we start with the PPA if this is easier for you. -- regards Thomas
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Am 2014-11-07 um 13:23 schrieb Thomas Lange:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 10:16:30 +0100, Moritz Struebe
moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said:
I think we can take care of almost all issues at packaging time as
described in [3].
Nice link. I didn't know that this was possible.
What are the current diffs in the packaging files for Ubuntu?
For my PPA none and the packages build and install just fine - the only
one I haven't installed yet is fai-quickstart. If I find some time I'll
move them to the official PPA.
The only real adjustments required by the PPA are
adding the PPA's URL and it's key to config and nfsroot.
IMO this will be only a few lines of diffs. How do you like to handle
those diffs in git?
Generally I'd like to avoid a second repo and rather use the techniques
described in [3]. And if that is not sufficient rather add a
configuration file that is adjusted before building.
If I find some time I'll also look into my apt-get madison* +
apt-add-repository idea. It would also allow to automatically add
http://fai-project.org/download to the sources.list. Something like
apt-cache madison fai-client | head -n 1 | awk -F '|' '{print $3}' |
xargs apt-add-repository
* I had that wrong in my last mail
I love to see an up-to-date FAI release for every Ubuntu LTS, maybe
for every release. I prefer having this in universe instead of a
PPA. But maybe we start with the PPA if this is easier for you.
Yes way PPA is easier. But once we got it working smoothly there, I
don't think it's a big issue to get it into universe. :)
Morty
--
Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Struebe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter)
Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme)
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Martensstr. 1
91058 Erlangen
Tel : +49 9131 85-25419
Fax : +49 9131 85-28732
eMail : stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de
WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 17:44:32 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: What are the current diffs in the packaging files for Ubuntu? For my PPA none and the packages build and install just fine - the only But isn't it much more comfortable, if the Ubuntu version of FAI already include the Ubuntu URLs? We did this in the past for the old Ubuntu versions. I would like to give the Ubuntu users a FAI package, that is ready-to-go, without the need of changing the configs too much. Or without the need for changing them at all. If we like to do this, how could be handle this in the build process or in the git tree? First let's make a list of files of the FAI sources, which may be different to those in Debian. I guess it's: conf/nfsroot.conf conf/sources.list examples/simple/files/etc/.../FAISERVER Any diffs in conf/NFSROOT? More files? -- regards Thomas
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 17:44:32 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: described in [3]. And if that is not sufficient rather add a configuration file that is adjusted before building. What about a ubuntu/patches subdir, which contains the patches needed for building the Ubuntu version? I there something that is used by other Ubuntu packages, which have only small diffs to the Debian version? -- regards Thomas
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Am 2014-11-05 um 18:55 schrieb Thomas Lange: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:37:28 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: Currently I see the following ways of improving things: * Get the FAI-Project at launchpad[1] up to date. Nice. I will contact someone, that can give you write access to the launchpad page. Oh, I already have access.. ;) I can do this, but it would be nice to have that extra branch with releases to automate the process (see my other mail) But creating a branch called release is not enough IMO. You'll have to apply some patches to make a release for Ubuntu. For e.g. package and repository names are different. How do you want to handle the diffs between the original FAI sources and the Ubuntu version of FAI? Well, actually it isn't that bad. Currently I'm building nightlies from the official trunk [1] and have an extra release branch in my own repo for my release-ppa [2]. The latter is in productive use. We are not using the server-package though, as we have our own tftp/nfs server. I think we can take care of almost all issues at packaging time as described in [3]. The only real adjustments required by the PPA are adding the PPA's URL and it's key to config and nfsroot. And using some dpkg madison + apt-add-repository - magic this should be possible in a generic way, too - even for your own repo. * Improve the example configuration I see two ways of doing this. First make a second example Ubuntu or just add all the necessary changes in comments. As one should look through the configuration anyway this might be the solution that is easiest to maintain. We already have a package_config/UBUNTU in FAI. Is this not sufficient? Sure the repository URLs are different for Ubuntu, but this should be done in the FAI package for Ubuntu. Yes, your are right. I was thinking this through while reading [4] and somehow my brain went down the wrong road - our own config, which I inherited, is too far away from that example * NFSROOT Ok, this is the one giving my the biggest headache. One solution would be to add an extra folder or something. IMO the nicer solution would be adapt the way the fai-client is working: Add a script that detects the right classes and use that to select the files. This would allow to not only manage those file on a distro-basis, but also on a release-bases. In the end it is possible to manage multiple nfs roots with the same config folder and the only file that needs to be adjusted is the nfsroot.conf. I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. Please give more details about your thoughts. Currently fai-setup and fai-make-nfsroot can be called with -C /etc/fai-ubuntu or something similar. Yes, that is what we are currently doing. None the less, this can be reduced to adjusting the path for deboostrap. From there on the sources.list and the packages for that distro can be selected automatically. Thus instead of passing a folder, one would only pass a single file. Cheers Morty [1] https://launchpad.net/~morty/+archive/ubuntu/fai [2] https://launchpad.net/~morty/+archive/ubuntu/fai-release [3] http://raphaelhertzog.com/2010/09/27/different-dependencies-between-debian-and-ubuntu-but-common-source-package/ [4] http://wiki.fai-project.org/wiki/Installing_Ubuntu_Linux_with_FAI -- Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Struebe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme) Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Martensstr. 1 91058 Erlangen Tel : +49 9131 85-25419 Fax : +49 9131 85-28732 eMail : stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:37:28 +0100, Moritz Struebe moritz.stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de said: Currently I see the following ways of improving things: * Get the FAI-Project at launchpad[1] up to date. Nice. I will contact someone, that can give you write access to the launchpad page. I can do this, but it would be nice to have that extra branch with releases to automate the process (see my other mail) But creating a branch called release is not enough IMO. You'll have to apply some patches to make a release for Ubuntu. For e.g. package and repository names are different. How do you want to handle the diffs between the original FAI sources and the Ubuntu version of FAI? * Improve the example configuration I see two ways of doing this. First make a second example Ubuntu or just add all the necessary changes in comments. As one should look through the configuration anyway this might be the solution that is easiest to maintain. We already have a package_config/UBUNTU in FAI. Is this not sufficient? Sure the repository URLs are different for Ubuntu, but this should be done in the FAI package for Ubuntu. * NFSROOT Ok, this is the one giving my the biggest headache. One solution would be to add an extra folder or something. IMO the nicer solution would be adapt the way the fai-client is working: Add a script that detects the right classes and use that to select the files. This would allow to not only manage those file on a distro-basis, but also on a release-bases. In the end it is possible to manage multiple nfs roots with the same config folder and the only file that needs to be adjusted is the nfsroot.conf. I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. Please give more details about your thoughts. Currently fai-setup and fai-make-nfsroot can be called with -C /etc/fai-ubuntu or something similar. -- regards Thomas
RFC: How to improve Ubuntu support
Hey there, we are currently using FAI for our Ubuntu systems. Once everything is set up, things run very smooth. None the less, we think that for new users things could be a bit smoother. Currently I see the following ways of improving things: * Get the FAI-Project at launchpad[1] up to date. I can do this, but it would be nice to have that extra branch with releases to automate the process (see my other mail) * Improve the example configuration I see two ways of doing this. First make a second example Ubuntu or just add all the necessary changes in comments. As one should look through the configuration anyway this might be the solution that is easiest to maintain. * NFSROOT Ok, this is the one giving my the biggest headache. One solution would be to add an extra folder or something. IMO the nicer solution would be adapt the way the fai-client is working: Add a script that detects the right classes and use that to select the files. This would allow to not only manage those file on a distro-basis, but also on a release-bases. In the end it is possible to manage multiple nfs roots with the same config folder and the only file that needs to be adjusted is the nfsroot.conf. Cheers Morty [1] https://launchpad.net/fai/ -- Dipl.-Ing. Moritz 'Morty' Struebe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 (Verteilte Systeme und Betriebssysteme) Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Martensstr. 1 91058 Erlangen Tel : +49 9131 85-25419 Fax : +49 9131 85-28732 eMail : stru...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de WWW : https://www4.cs.fau.de/~morty smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
