Op 20100328 om 01:57 schreef Fatih Tolga Ata: > Hi, > The OSes in my san servers boot slower than the remote machines which > boot from iSCSI targets. So, the remote machines can't boot because > iSCSI targets are still booting at this time. So if I want to restart > san servers, I have to go to the server room to restart the all remote > machines. So, is there any command line option to delay the booting? > I've looked at this page http://etherboot.org/wiki/commandline . But I > didn't find any info about delaying. > > Regards. > _______________________________________________
Op 20100328 om 03:42 schreef Miller, Shao: > > Given that gPXE has a strong focus on small code size for ROM build > targets, could 'waitfor' or other similar use cases be better > implemented in a more generic fashion? > > If the check can be accomplished by repeated download attempts in a > loop, the scripting discussion in the gPXE developers' mailing-list > could potentially come to fruition and accomplish this same behaviour in > a more programmatically generic way, with 'if' and loops, for example. > > As it stands, there are patches not yet committed to the gPXE official > code-base which can accomplish the behaviour of the suggested 'waitfor' > command, if the assumption is that a download trial is roughly the same > as testing for <port>. > > #!gpxe > clear script_errors > dhcp net0 > : test_download > chain http://ip:8080/some_boot_file > sleep 10 > goto test_download > > In the above, 'chain' should not return, but if it does, we wait ten > seconds and retry. The above does not work in current gPXE, but does > work with some of the patches under discussion. > > - Shao Miller > _______________________________________________ Op 20100328 om 11:55 schreef Piotr Jaroszy??ski: > On 28 March 2010 11:42, Jonathan Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > > In that case could not waitfor simply be a macro within gpxe as all the > > underlying functions would be in the codebase ? :-D > > I think the idea is to just keep trying what you want to accomplish > instead of doing some additional check to see whether the server is up > at all. > > > I prefer readable simple functions, the "chain" in the above code does > > not seem obvious or friendly, also I cant even see how that loop escapes > > - to me it reads as stuck as "goto" is not conditional? > > Chain is like exec(), it doesn't return if successful. > > -- > Best Regards > Piotr Jaroszy??ski > _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ gPXE mailing list [email protected] http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe
