> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 12:43:22 +0200
> From: Per Foreby
> Subject: Re: Fai on Ubuntu 9.10 status?
> To: linux-fai
> Message-ID: <4aa240ca.1020...@ddg.lth.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Softupdate would do for me. You can always install the base in some
> oth
Hi,
On Freitag, 4. September 2009, Per Foreby wrote:
> To me, softupdate is more important than install. The base installation
> can be achieved in other ways.
to me too!
regards,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Robert Markula wrote:
> I'm going offtopic here, but if nothing else works and you *need*
> softupdate functionality, you could always revert to some config
> management tool.
But the whole point of the discussion is, that some people rather like
_FAI_ as their config management tool - that's wha
Hi Henning,
Henning Sprang wrote:
> It's not very helpful to the cause of spreading FAI usage to send
> them another way if FAI can do the same - in many aspects better, and by
> far mnore flexible, because it can incorporate all the other tools and
> programming language you like.
Well, I'm not
Robert Markula wrote:
> Well, I'm not an evangelist of any specific software or platform. Any
> software is just a tool to get work done, and I like good tools, that's
> why I like FAI - because it is one of those proven, reliable tools that
> tremendously speeds up my work and simplifies many thin
Hi again!
Henning Sprang wrote:
> With the removal decision FAI gives away the potential for larger
> adoption - despite it is perfectly useable for config management on many
> distributions - even when installation functionality does not work (and
> even therefore there was a good workaround docu
