New design, what is the Goal here?

DJ Lucas dj at
Mon Nov 28 21:44:47 PST 2005

Bruce Dubbs wrote:

> Actually, I have also been trying to understand the rationale for the
> remote build.  When I had several identical systems to build, I built
> one, tarred everything up, scp'ed the tarball, untarred, edited needed
> files (ip address, hostname, etc) and rebooted.  Worked fine.

I believe I'm speculating beyond the intended design goals, but at this 
point the proposed alfs client has been positioned in my mind as a 
central management tool.  It can be used to build several LFSs, but who 
said it has to 'build' anything? :-) If implemented correctly, and I 
like what I've heard so far, it would be great for any 3 or more similar 
machines.  IOW build on one, tar it up and do a 'push' from the alfs 
client to the other two servers.  Once the initial profile is created 
for a push type installation, updates continue to reuse the same config 
files and become increasingly easier.

I'm thinking of a single directory on the alfs client PC with a config 
file for each server.  In that config file you have hostname, ip 
address, users' IDs, network path to home dirs, and other machine 
specific variables (differences).  A single loop script to call the alfs 
client software and throw it a config file, a server name, and a 
standard profile.  An hour later you have 25, 50, 100... completely 
updated, and configured, ready to run PCs waiting for you to sit down 
and use them with zero configuration left to do if you've tweaked your 
profile correctly.

Something else that was hinted about elsewhere in this thread was how to 
use it for single builds where client==server.  You must have root 
access to kick off a build, so no need for authentication from, just a check for the uid, assuming that there are no know 
cracks to simulate 127. from a network PC (network cracking is the 
absolute furthest from any specialty of mine) and gain root access.  In 
fact, this should be the default configuration.  If you really want to 
use client/server, then it'll have to be explicitly configured with 
keypairs and passphrases and what not anyway.

> Rebuilding for every system seems to be a bit of overkill.  Copying
> seems to be the way to go.
> The only things I can see that would differ on different machines (of
> similar architecture) are a few config files and maybe the kernel.


Watching and waiting anxiously...

-- DJ Lucas

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list