RE: [Thinstation-general] The structure of ts.conf.buildtime

[Michael C. <MC...@Ne...>]

I would much rather manage 1 config file, then manage 5-10.  And yes, the
thinstation config files are confusing at first.  
There are to many, and the only 2 examples on the website.



Michael Clark
Nemschoff Chairs Inc
mclark at nemschoff dot com
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, MCP
Voice: (920) 457 7726 x294
Fax:  (920) 453 6594


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Eriksen [mailto:km...@ma...]
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 3:19 PM
> To: Matthew E. Bernold
> Cc: thi...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Thinstation-general] The structure of ts.conf.buildtime
> 
> 
> Thanks for your input Matthew.
> 
> I'm not comletely sure I agree with your points. Well, 
> actually I don't 
> :-)
> 
> I believe that yet another ts.conf is not the right way to 
> go. These are 
> plenty already and it is terrible confusing as it is. And all these 
> ts.confs are in the core completely structural identical 
> except for nine 
> lines unique to ts.conf.buildtime (setting ip, mask, dns...).
> 
> I would rather have just a complete "buildtime" with introductionary 
> comments as the one I've attached here. The nine unique line for 
> "buildtime" are at the very end and clearly marked as unique.
> 
> I believe it makes things much clearer that "there is ONE 
> ts.conf you can 
> apply multiple times". But this requires a unified ts.conf.
> 
> Still, thanks for you constructive input.
> 
> Mike 
> 
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Matthew E. Bernold wrote:
> 
> > As an addition to my previous E-Mail, I can see why Miles 
> might want to keep
> > the ts.conf.buildtime as clean as possible.  It is tempting 
> to put too much
> > information in a locally built file, and rather difficult 
> to change it once
> > you do.  If the ts.conf.buildtime were a full conf file, 
> more people would
> > be tempted just to use it without exploring the more 
> manageable options.  I
> > think that both sides are valid, which is why I suggested 
> the compromise of
> > adding another .conf file loaded locally between the 
> ts.conf.buildtime and
> > the ts.conf.network.  This allows for a very clean 
> ts.conf.buildtime for
> > those people who don't need local options, and a more detailed
> > ts.conf.localboot for those people who find they need it.
> > 
> > I think, btw, that by default, TS should come with a 
> ts.conf.localboot that
> > is just comments so there aren't a whole bunch of undesired 
> defaults running
> > around out there.  Maybe something like this:
> > 
> > # This file, thinstation.conf.localboot, is used to set 
> defaults for a
> > # ThinStation that boots from local storage, so it can 
> function without a
> > # TFTP server.  If you find you need this option, just copy the
> > # thinstation.conf.example file over this one, and then set 
> your options.
> > 
> > Matthew E. Bernold
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Eriksen [mailto:km...@ma...]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 6:39 PM
> > To: thi...@li...
> > Subject: [Thinstation-general] The structure of ts.conf.buildtime
> > 
> > 
> > Miles and I recently had a private e-mail exchange on 
> something else, that 
> > ended up being an discussion on the structure of 
> > thinstation.conf.buildtime ("buildtime"). We've decided to 
> start it again 
> > here publically to get your opinion.
> > 
> > Miles obviously wants buildtime to be as it is (otherwise 
> he'd changed it
> > already :-)
> > 
> > I want to change buildtime to be as ts.conf.example. e.g. with the 
> > complete setup, which is perfectly possible as things are 
> now. No code has
> > to be changed.
> > 
> > My arguments are:
> > 
> > For boot from local devices you really need a complete 
> buildtime, not just 
> > the cut down version with network settings only. OK, if you 
> boot from a RW 
> > device, you may get around the problem by using a 
> ts.conf.user, but for a 
> > CD there is no way you can avoid putting everything in 
> buildtime as it is 
> > RO. Even with loadlin on a RW device a ts.conf.user is 
> impossible due to 
> > the DOS 8.3 file name convention (and I guess the same goes 
> for syslinux,
> > but I never tried).
> > 
> > Also it makes a lot of sense to me to build any image with useful 
> > defaults, so things can fail gracefully.
> >  
> > Since all the ts.conf(.buildtime, .network, .user, 
> .group-<name>, -<name>, 
> > -<ip>, -<mac>) really are identical in structure, I think 
> that having an 
> > apparently different buildtime file is confusing.
> > 
> > Comments?
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Thinstation FAQ maintainer
> http://thinstation.sourceforge.net
> - a light, full featured linux based thin client OS
> 


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This electronic transmission, including all
attachments, is directed in confidence solely to the person(s) to whom it is
addressed, or an authorized recipient, and may not otherwise be distributed,
copied or disclosed. The contents of the transmission may also be subject to
intellectual property rights and all such rights are expressly claimed and
are not waived. If you have received this transmission in error, please
notify the sender immediately by return electronic transmission and then
immediately delete this transmission, including all attachments, without
copying, distributing or disclosing same.