Future of FAI (fwd)

[Thomas Lange]

>>>>> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 10:40:58 +0800 (WST), Niall Young <niall at chime.net.au> said:

    > most over the years - it's infinitely flexible but still vague.
Vague, because it so flexible. I think more examples for the classes
will make things clearer.

    > post-install, probably other types of classes too.  It'd make
    > sense to split them up and order them in into
    > hardware;OS;application at a minimum, applications will
    > definitly need ordering if you're layering multiple functional
I think it's a bad idea to split the classes into several
categories. If you have a "hardaware class" for SCSI you will also
need a "package class" for SCSI. So why make life complicated? The
class SCSI should be used for the hardware (load a certain SCSI kernel
module) and the software (add a pacakge like scsitools) and scripts
that tune your OS configuration (add a line to fstab for the SCSI CDROM).

But it would be nice to have all these information for the class SCSI
in one file. I will add this into my TODO for fai 3.0.
-- 
Gruss Thomas