Using Netboot with FOG

[Guest monkeyx]

A big part of getting netboot installs working is that you need a working DHCP, PXE, TFTP server setup, etc. So given that fog provides this infrastructure out of the box, I thought it might a good idea to see if I could get it working via FOG

 

Below is an example I knocked together that shows how I got this working on Fog 0.19

 

 

Download relevant netboot file for your desired version of Ubuntu. ie 8.04 LTS is at the following link:-

 

Index of /ubuntu/dists/hardy/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot

then download netboot.tar.gz

 

 

Then tar -xvzf netboot.tar.gz in an unrelated folder to fog ie your home folder etc.

 

Then sudo cp -R ubuntu-installer /tftpboot/fog/

 

 

In order to give files same permissions as file in that folder

 

 

sudo chown -R fog:root /tftpboot/fog/ubuntu-installer

sudo chmod -R 777 /tftpboot/fog/ubuntu-installer

 

then edit file /tftpboot/pxelinux.cfg/default

 

and insert a related label for your installation, I am showing the default 804 install option below

 

LABEL fog.ubuntu804

kernel fog/ubuntu-installer/i386/linux

append vga=normal initrd=fog/ubuntu-installer/i386/initrd.gz --

 

 

On PXE booting into Fog issue command fog.ubuntu804

 

I can now install Ubuntu to a PC/Server without a CD rom drive

 

Any feedback comments, then please let me know.

[matt40k]

Well done, just a shame it's Ubuntu

[amfony]

whats "wrong" with ubuntu? being a modest linux user im noticing a distaste for ubuntu compared to ...debian, slackware, gentoo? Totally off topic so i apologise.

[matt40k]

Rant mode: ON

 

Same thing that's wrong with GUI's, they stop users from actually using there brains. They don't know whats going on, they just use the wizard.

 

GUI kills scripters.

GUI = more load on the system

 

GUI = Home\END users

 

U don't really see ubuntu in console mode, plus it does take a lot of flack for being the "new boy in town"

I prefer Openbsd. you know where you are, in stable, secure enviro, I hate having to lock down a system, it's like, why do you have to do it? It should be secure by default

 

Rant mode: OFF

Edited September 10, 2008 by matt40k

[Geoff]

Ubuntu has a server edition, which does not install a GUI by default. I have several systems running it.

[matt40k]

And yet I still don't like it! LOOOL

 

I don't know why, it's just when people say server I don't think Ubuntu. I know it has a good user base. But I still have it labelled as a rip of Windows and not a good operating system like CentOS, Open\Free\NetBSD, Gentoo, Debian, and oh... what's it call.. Novells one.

[Geoff]

Novell's is called SUSE.

 

Also remember that Ubuntu is based on Debian even to the point where some Debian developers work in the same areas for Ubuntu (eg package management). So I can't really see how you can include Debian on your list and still think it's a Windows rip. It's all the same software, the only difference is in the configuration and default package selection.

[matt40k]

OpenBSD came from NetBSD, I don't think they would be happy if you said they was the same tho.

 

I think it must be because some n00by chav wannabe geek had Ubuntu on his system. Debian was first shown to me in little better light.

[Teth]

not really a very professional opinion I feel Matt.

 

GUI is not and should not be taken as an indication of unprofessional, simplistic or inefficient. They would not be as pervasive across all forms of technology from academic research to consumer mobile phones if they were.

 

Neither should command line be automatically assumed to be superior and more professional. There are a tonne of very bad command line environments out there. And situations where a command line is not even a realistic choice.

 

You, me and most of the readership of edugeek may be most comfortable and most productive at the command line but our daily tasks suite its design focus. Quick access to specific known functions and task often performed in large similar batches.

 

However score a command line environment of any kind for intuitive use. Can you sit down at say a french command line environment in which all commands even ls have been translated to french how fast would we get anything done. Yet sit down in front of completely translated french windows XP and there would be very little to stop you acheiving most user or admin tasks because the very layout of a GUI provides an intuitive indication of its function.

 

Not a perfect analogy but passable I think.

 

Ubuntu is trying to get Linux desktop user acceptance and that comes from something they can pick up and use with the knowledge they already have. Once you've got them working they will gradually pick up more advanced features and workflows that the new environment provides. This would never happen if day one starts a week of training to completely relearn their base skills. That is Ubuntu desktop's goal to quietly and almost subversively convert day to day users. They are I might add still along way off but they are building on the stable framework of Debain and making good progress.

 

On the server side its still debain under the hood and by default there is no GUI slowing it down. There is however still their massive library of pre packaged software with mostly sensible default configurations to let people get into Linux at a pace they can deal with.

 

Ubuntu is again at the server end going for a sensible middle ground. They provide a stable base on which to put whatever services you need in a way that is intuitive to anyone who already has advanced windows skills with the command line. Its all different but its also enough the same that there is a learning curve there and not a brick wall. The skills learnt are transferable so I think what they are doing is good for Linux and open source.

 

Please don't dismiss them offhand. "Ubuntu is a gateway drug"

[matt40k]

My god! I say I don't like it and I get a essay!

 

I never have had to use Ubuntu because:

 

1. Everything uses Windows

2. Everything that isn't Windows is Linux

 

Linux = Centos for most stuff

Linux = Openbsd for Firewalls, Wireless accesspoints etc

Linux = Redhat\SUSE for (education) end users whatever

 

Ubuntu as far as I am aware doesn't have a qualification, it's never going to be as secure as OpenBSD nor as light.

 

I general find is becuase I can get quick, good help for CentOS, Openbsd...

 

Forgot to say, use whatever you know best, find easy to use, best for the application etc.

 

Note:

 

MAJORLY OFF TOPIC lol

[sparkeh]

whats "wrong" with ubuntu? being a modest linux user im noticing a distaste for ubuntu compared to ...debian, slackware, gentoo?

 

Snobbery. Thats all.

 

*Shakes off a dying scripter pathetically clutching at his trouser leg for help* I've used various linux distros over the last 10 years and I am very happy with Ubuntu at the moment.

 

Anyway back on topic, thanks Monkeyx for showing us that, very useful

[amfony]

Snobbery. Thats all.

 

I gathered as much, but i couldnt find the technical reason for this? By the way when i use linux it is almost exclusivley ubuntu, and im no ashamed of that fact haha

 

Also when i was referring to "ubuntu" i was meaning the server gui-less edition. It looks lovely with the Gui though.