On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:22:26AM +0200, Oded Naveh wrote: > Vagrant Cascadian Tuesday, October 21, 2008 8:15 PM > > something else must be broken with your DHCP setup, then. > > there isn't any magic to network booting a thin client vs. a > > diskless workstation. > > how would it work for one but not the other? > Thanks for pointing that out, I believed it had something to do with > the way ltsp handles thin-clients and do some forwarding on their behalf. > Turns out you were absolutely right, the root-path option in my dhcpd.conf > was: > option root-path "10.0.2.2:/opt/ltsp/i386"; > Which apparently didn't make sense to nfsmount, setting this to: > option root-path "/opt/ltsp/i386"; > Made it redundant at "/var/lib/tftpboot/ltsp/i386/pxelinux.cfg/default". > > I should mention that this line was introduced to > "/etc/dhcp3/dhcpd-stateless-debian-edu.conf" by a script "ltsp-make-client" > and the file dhcpd.conf is merely a symlink to > "dhcpd-stateless-debian-edu.conf"
ah, yes. the versions of initramfs-tools in lenny supports putting the server's ip in root-path, but the version in etch didn't (you need to use next-server). > That brought up the question whether it would be beneficial to upgrade to > Lenny or to Sid? > As this is not a 'production' server and is only for studying the system > (may be help with development later). lenny's ltsp is in good shape, so i would definitely recommend giving it a try if it's not for production. if you're really adventurous, try the ltsp/ltspfs/ldm packages from experimental :) there are also some backports of ltsp, ldm and ltspfs packages for etch from the pkg-ltsp group: http://wiki.debian.org/LTSP/Howto/Etch-With-Backports live well, vagrant -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
