Unable to use different lts.conf with different images

[Karl Rosenbaum]

Binary package hint: ltsp-client-core

When using ltsp with multiple images, for example one image for thin clients and one image for fat clients, you cannot have different lts.conf files for the different images. The problem seems to be that ltsp_nbd does not care what tftp path the kernel comes from, it will just go for what is stored in the "filename" varaible. This filename variable can be changed on a per-mac basis in dhcpd.conf, but I don't always know what image the user decides to boot in the pxelinux boot menu.

I suggest that instead of the line:

tftpath=$(echo ${filename%/*}|tr -d '"')

use the following:

tftpath=$(echo ${initrd%/*})

This way we would read lts.conf from the same directory as the initrd image was downloaded from.

Ubuntu release: 9.10
package: ltsp-client-core 5.1.90-0ubuntu3

[Alkis Georgopoulos (alkisg)]

In my default LTSP installation, echo $initrd gives "initrd.img", without the /ltsp/i386 tftp path in front of it.
How's this going to help in having different lts.conf files per chroot?

If you have already have a pxelinux menu, you could pass e.g. tftppath=/ltsp/fati386 as a kernel parameter for one of those entries. This way, if we changed the ltsp_nbd code from:
ftppath="$(echo "$filename" | sed -n 's,\"*\(.*/\)[^/]*,\1,p')"
(note that that particular line has changed a little) to:
tftppath="${tftppath:-$(echo "$filename" | sed -n 's,\"*\(.*/\)[^/]*,\1,p')}"
then the kernel tftppath parameter would be preferred, and so you could have different lts.conf files per chroot.

Would that work for you?

Note though that you *can* use the same chroot for both thin and fat clients. Any particular reason why you need 2 different chroots?

[Karl Rosenbaum (kalle)]

Ok, on my setup $initrd gives /ltsp/fati386/initrd.img. That's why I thought it might be a reasonable solution.

Anyway, your suggestion looks very good to me. That's even better since it provides more flexibility.

I didn't know that I can use the same chroot for both clients. Is that something new in ltsp 5.2 and the built-in fat client? I'm not using the built-in fat client support (yet), but the script found on Nubae's site (http://www.nubae.com/ltsp-linux-terminal-server-project-netbooted-fat-client-for-ubuntu-hardy-and-intrepid) with some modifications. But the thin client is the built-in one.

[Alkis Georgopoulos (alkisg)]

I haven't used nubae's script, but yes, with the new fat client script in LTSP 5.2, using the same chroot for both thin and fat clients is easily accomplishable.
Here's a small how to, for Karmic and Lucid: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuLTSP/FatClients

[Karl Rosenbaum (kalle)]

Just to clarify: I would still like to see your proposed change, since we will still need to have multiple chroots with different sets of applications installed. And those chroots will possibly need different lts.conf files. Otherwise we can still change ltsp_nbd locally prior to building the kernels. Anyway, I would appreciate if you could give me a hint on what you decide here. Thank you.

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

[Expired for ltsp (Ubuntu) because there has been no activity for 60 days.]