lange at informatik.uni-koeln.de
Thu Feb 21 10:35:40 CET 2013
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:50:31 -0500, George VerDuin <gfv2008-home at yahoo.com> said:
> I have stumbled into a question of use. There seems to be some unusual overlap and/or duplication:
> For just a couple examples:
> * fia/package_config/FAIBASE and /etc/fai/NFSROOT [both specify the rsync package -- a duplication]
> * fia/package_config/DEFAULT and /etc/fai/NFSROOT [each specify different [perhaps partial definitions]
> linux-image... packages for AMD64]
These duplications are not unusual for FAI. In /etc/fai we defined
things for creating the nfsroot. Therefore /etc/fai/NFSROOT contains a
list of packages to be installed into the
nfsroot. /etc/fai/apt/sources.list is used for locating the package
repository when creating the nfsroot. Package listed in
package_config/FAIBASE (and similar files) are only used when
installing the install clients. So, this is pretty normal in FAI and
sometimes this confuses people.
> My purpose in posting issue 2 is to ask if FAI is more rich when
> ported from the FAI site or from distro repositories?
> I'm not throwing brick-bats at the packaging teams, just
> curious about missing changes to FAI while it works it's
> way thru the various publication paths.
The FAI packages from the fai-project.org site are always the best to
use. They may have newer versions than the distro repositories. These
versions are recommended and tested by me for the different Debian
This does not apply to the Ubuntu packages! I do not test them at all
and currently noone cares about the FAI packages in Ubuntu. This is
the reason why FAI and Ubuntu is not running so smooth as with Debian.
More information about the linux-fai