On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 01:17:38PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 10:39:39PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > > FAIR > > Full Automatic Installation Revisited. > > More or less. :-) I don't know FAI in detail, but as far as I can tell, it > contains a lot of infrastructure (ie. a full installation program, lots of > server stuff etc.) that simply shouldn't be neccessary anymore with d-i. > OTOH, people seem to be using it, and it is actively maintained.
I'm a reasonable sized user of FAI, and I've taken a strong interest in beta testing d-i, and I also have some KickStart experience (probably more after I update my RHCE next week). >From my experience, what I believe the automated installs in d-i to do (not having seen it done or tested it yet), it's not going to scratch the surface of the functionality that FAI does, and FAI pisses all over KickStart for flexibility (with the appropriate increase in learning curve and complexity). I think d-i automated installs and FAI will both have their place, going forward, for different reasons. d-i may be good for a bare-metal recovery of an existing installation, whereas FAI is probably going to be better at deploying new installations on inconsistent hardware (I use it to run up infrastructure servers, on random hardware). Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
