Thomas Lange wrote: > FAI is no image installer but a way of doing an fully automated > installation, controlled by scripts. Using FAI, image backups are not > needed any more.
There's a difference between 'needed' and 'required'. :( I have run into some guys which required absolutely 100% identical installations. In my opinion it was just some 'cover my ass' tactic. Where's the difference if the system is created by deploying an image or the OS installed from a customized mirror holding the officially sanctioned (by the company not the distribution) software release version? Luckily a) I worked in a different team & environment, so I didn't have to comply to these rules. b) I don't work for that company any more. If I had to comply to their rules then it probably would have ended in fai dd'ing an 'officially signed' OS image. I do understand if some software requires specific version of libraries and stuff. After all the software was developed and tested against these software versions and strange errors may occur otherwise. What I don't understand is why it is necessary to require every single software package on a server having its specific version. This smells a lot like "We don't know why it works, but it does work. DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING!"