Re: Installer caching selections across different installations... how?
I have been installing OpenBSD 4.6 inside a VMWare ESXi 4.0 virtual machine and ran into a strange behavior I can't explain... it seems to cache my installation options between totally unrelated virtual machines. The process goes like this: I create a new 'Typical' virtual machine, select 'Other' as the guest OS and choose 'Other (32-bit)' in the Version pulldown menu. I accept all default settings (256MB ram, 1 vCPU, 8GB disk, etc) and check the Thin Provisioning disk allocation checkbox. I then associate the cd46.iso file (stored on a datastore) with the virtual cdrom drive and boot off of it to begin the installation process, where I specify a local LAN ftp server to fetch the install media from. The install process goes as expected and the virtual machine is running happily along... The thing is, when I create a second brand new virtual machine using the process described above and get to the 'select install media' step, it already has my local ftp server's name populated! As far as I can tell, the only thing in common between the two installation processes is the cd46.iso file. This isn't necessarily bad, I just can't explain why its happening. Two questions: 1) Is anyone else observing this behavior? 2) Can anyone explain why it is occurring? It is entirely intentional, and designed into the install scripts. For the large majority of people, this is very helpful behaviour. For people using NAT and other IP sharing mechanisms, yes, it can be akward, but you are (and will remain) in the minority.
Re: Installer caching selections across different installations... how?
Ah, this definitely makes sense. It is a handy little feature but I am a little surprised the privacy advocates out there in OpenBSD-land didn't cry foul about reporting information back to the mothership like that. Perhaps they finally learned that we would not care in the least what they cried about.
Re: Installer caching selections across different installations... how?
The install process goes as expected and the virtual machine is running happily along... The thing is, when I create a second brand new virtual machine using the process described above and get to the 'select install media' step, it already has my local ftp server's name populated! As far as I can tell, the only thing in common between the two installation processes is the cd46.iso file. This isn't necessarily bad, I just can't explain why its happening. Two questions: 1) Is anyone else observing this behavior? 2) Can anyone explain why it is occurring? the installer pulls the list of installation mirrors from ftp.openbsd.org and defaults to one that is assumed to be closest to you based on your ip address (using geolocation). at the end of the installation, the mirror you chose (in your case, your local ftp server) is sent back to ftp.openbsd.org so that it will be given to you again the next time, assuming your ip is the same. from distrib/miniroot/install.sh: # If we managed to talk to the ftplist server before, tell it what # location we used... so it can perform magic next time if [[ -s $SERVERLISTALL ]]; then _i= [[ -n $installedfrom ]] _i=install=$installedfrom [[ -n $TZ ]] _i=$_iTZ=$TZ [[ -n $method ]] _i=$_imethod=$method [[ -n $_i ]] ftp $FTPOPTS -a -o - \ http://129.128.5.191/cgi-bin/ftpinstall.cgi?$_i; /dev/null 21 fi because your vmware installations are presumably all coming from the same ip address, you keep receiving your local ftp server as a default.
Re: Installer caching selections across different installations... how?
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 7:45 PM, joshua stein j...@openbsd.org wrote: at the end of the installation, the mirror you chose (in your case, your local ftp server) is sent back to ftp.openbsd.org so that it will be given to you again the next time, assuming your ip is the same. ... because your vmware installations are presumably all coming from the same ip address, you keep receiving your local ftp server as a default. Ah, this definitely makes sense. It is a handy little feature but I am a little surprised the privacy advocates out there in OpenBSD-land didn't cry foul about reporting information back to the mothership like that. (I couldn't find any inside MARC anyway when searching for installer-related posts). Thanks for taking the time, I appreciate the effort. Matt
