I'm forwarding your request on to the gPXE Developers' mailing-list, since I think the folks there would be well-suited to voice opinions on your request. - Shao
________________________________________ From: Jarrod Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 14:41 To: Miller, Shao Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: FW: [gPXE] environment variable expansion in 'filename'? Would you mind a patch to add the expand_command to autoboot.c? On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Miller, Shao <[email protected]> wrote: Hey again Jarrod, I'm forwarding this on to the gPXE list. gPXE actually does support conditionals right now, though they're extremely icky. See "crazy scripting library" thread[1] or "fall-back filename" thread[2]. However, there doesn't seem to be much interest, much time, much support, much discussion, or some combination thereof for a couple of [relatively] recent proposals to enhance gPXE's scripting/CLI system[3]. - Shao Miller [1] http://etherboot.org/pipermail/gpxe/2010-March/000646.html [2] http://etherboot.org/pipermail/gpxe/2010-April/000846.html [3] http://etherboot.org/pipermail/gpxe-devel/2010-March/000102.html ________________________________________ From: Jarrod Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 14:19 To: Miller, Shao Subject: Re: [gPXE] environment variable expansion in 'filename'? So, currently, that's how it goes and I used fixed-address declarations so looking up the 'best' next-server isn't too hard. Without fixed-address, things start getting tricky based on what I'm trying to do. While still possible for me to externally coordinate what network the booting device will land in, it would be much simpler for my purposes to inherit 'next-server' from the 'subnet {}' portion of dhcp, but I need to specify per-node paths at a host declaration level. Things get hypothetically trickier if netboot with DHCPv6 comes into life following the rule in DHCPv6 where DUID is constant regardless of interface when I'm dealing with multihomed devices. There I might have a single host declaration that has to describe two network relationships, but that's all theoretical. On a related note, is it horribly objectionable or a bad idea for expand_command from exec.c to be called from boot_next_server_and_filename from autoboot.c? Failing that I'll contemplate an embedded script, but lack of conditionals is gPXE scripting could prove to be a touchy thing. _______________________________________________ gPXE-devel mailing list [email protected] http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe-devel
