Okay, I was just one more document away from my answer. :D
According to:
https://theforeman.org/plugins/foreman_discovery/6.0/index.html#2.Installation
The magic sauce is:
append initrd=initrd0.img root=live:CDLABEL=fdi rootfstype=auto ro
rd.live.image acpi=force rd.luks=0 rd.md=0 rd.dm=0
pro
Hello,
I'm attempting to using a bootable ISO to discover hosts (vs PXE). I created a
bootable ISO using https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-discovery-image, and
changed my "append" line in isolinux/isolinux.cfg to say:
append initrd=initrd0.img root=live:CDLABEL=fdi rootfstype=auto ro
rd.l
Is anyone running Foreman in production in a container? I'm working on a
new installation and I'd much rather get it running in a container than on
a VM.
I see some containers on Docker hub (there's a foreman nightly build
https://hub.docker.com/r/foreman/foreman/ ) but it looks mostly abandone
Thanks for input.
My issue had to do with organisastions and locations.
Once all my templates, os, subnets etc was tied to same organisation, all
was well.
Regards
EInar
tirsdag 4. oktober 2016 11.08.48 UTC+2 skrev Daniel Lobato følgende:
>
> From what I see in this Kickstart, nothing is
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:20:24PM -0700, Erez Zarum wrote:
> It is a known "issue" and i state "issue" as this is an expected behavior,
> If you provision a VM from Foreman it means you wish to control the whole
> life cycle of this VM, It acts the same as physical server.
I disagree here.
On 07/10/16 10:58, yamakasi@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm not sure but is the installer here failing on the same bug as
> http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/14568 ?
>
> [ERROR 2016-10-07 11:56:20 verbose] Evaluation Error: Error while
> evaluating a Function Call, undefined class/module HighLine:
I'm not sure but is the installer here failing on the same bug as
http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/14568 ?
[ERROR 2016-10-07 11:56:20 verbose] Evaluation Error: Error while
evaluating a Function Call, undefined class/module HighLine:: at
/usr/share/gems/gems/kafo-0.9.2/modules/kafo_config
OK great, I will go back to my snapshot and let you know!
Op vrijdag 7 oktober 2016 09:45:29 UTC+2 schreef Dominic Cleal:
>
> On 07/10/16 08:44, yamaka...@gmail.com wrote:
> > What I mean is, when you install the 4.0 repo and run the
> > foreman-installer from scratch, does it understand that i
On 07/10/16 08:44, yamakasi@gmail.com wrote:
> What I mean is, when you install the 4.0 repo and run the
> foreman-installer from scratch, does it understand that it needs to use
> /etc/puppetlabs instead if /etc/puppet ?
Yes, AIO Puppet installations with these paths are supported from 1.12.0
What I mean is, when you install the 4.0 repo and run the foreman-installer
from scratch, does it understand that it needs to use /etc/puppetlabs
instead if /etc/puppet ?
Op vrijdag 7 oktober 2016 09:42:16 UTC+2 schreef Dominic Cleal:
>
> On 07/10/16 08:35, yamaka...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You
On 07/10/16 08:35, yamakasi@gmail.com wrote:
> You are right it's copied, but it also didn't change when I edited it.
>
> What about the puppet 4.0 paths, are they honored ? so it uses
> /etc/puppetlabs/puppet instead of /etc/puppet ?
If the original answers file was using the Fedora non-AIO
You are right it's copied, but it also didn't change when I edited it.
What about the puppet 4.0 paths, are they honored ? so it uses
/etc/puppetlabs/puppet instead of /etc/puppet ?
Thanks!
Op vrijdag 7 oktober 2016 09:09:15 UTC+2 schreef Dominic Cleal:
>
> On 07/10/16 01:38, yamaka...@gmail.co
On 07/10/16 01:38, yamakasi@gmail.com wrote:
> On a default CentOS 7 install with the right repo's enables, EPEL and
> SCLO I get the following, according to search on a package using yum the
> package-names in the installer are wrong.
>
> Any idea how to fix this ?
>
> On Fedora this went fi
13 matches
Mail list logo
