New design, what is the Goal here?
dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Nov 28 22:14:09 PST 2005
Sorry if this comes through twice. It seems like gmane has over twenty
minute lag for this message so I've resent it.
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
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
127.0.0.0, 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