underdog's picture
Heyja sory for my bad english i need an fog server but i installed it major times and everytime to manny errors and bugs. im wonder why turnkey linux dont have an fog appliance :?:P its an realy cool linux app and verry useful im wondering do you guys can make an .iso image?
Liraz Siri's picture

Sounds like a great idea. We might get to that in the next release batch. By fog I'm going to assume you mean the free computer cloning solution right?

underdog's picture

Yes its an Cloning system.  its verry handy if you want to make an easy and fast backup for your computers or server over pxe boot.

Jeremy Davis's picture

See Rik's build notes here and my start on a TKLPatch (precursor to an official appliance) here. So some work has started, by no fully working solution yet... Hopefully I'll get back in to dev mode sometime soon and do some more work on this, but as I stated in my most recent post on the TKLPatch thread, I have a FOG server working on TKL and have been using it to test deployment of Win7 on a couple of machines. I still have more work to do on it (including getting it to deploy Linux images and run LiveCDs too) but hopefully I'll get back to it soon.

underdog's picture

ist it posbile to bring some beta version of fog image solution in a short time?

Jeremy Davis's picture

But in the meantime, what is on my GitHub account (as detailed in the thread I linked to above) is a basic TKLPatch (which is what I used to install my FOG server). So it is an unofficial beta of sorts, just you have to build it yourself...

Clark's picture

+1 & following!

Mark N's picture

Any chance this might move forward again? I realize we have an entire generation of IT folks who believe everything will be in "the cloud" forevermore, but there is a significant installed-base of on-premises IT infrastructure, and some folks who's strategy doesn't include "all cloud" solutions. So a nice imaging system would be lovely!
Jeremy Davis's picture

I've personally used the FOG project in the past and found it to be awesome, so I totally agree.

The only thing that is a little bit of a pain is that their install script is quite opinionated and clearly designed to be run on an existing server. I know that they are trying to make it easier for users to install, but unfortunately, it'd be better for us if they just documented the install steps.

I've looked at it a few times and there are 2 obvious options. Either we'd need to pull apart the install script and just manually do the steps (cleanest way, but then probably a PITA to maintain). Or alternatively, feed the required switches/answers to the install script (probably easier to maintain but would require some hacks). Then, either way, we'd also need to create some inithooks so that the required config could be updated on firstboot.

I have had a quick crack at the latter and it seems perhaps easier than I had initially thought. Although it's currently failing because it makes calls to the 'systemctl' command (which doesn't work in our build chroot). So we'd need to tweak our temporary systemctl wrapper to cope with that (not that big a deal...). And obviously, we'd still need to do the firstboot (re)configuration.

Also it appears that the installer can be run with an existing config file and it will be honoured. The config file appears to be well documented, so perhaps we could leverage that for the install?

Add new comment