Feedback

Installation issues, feature requests, help, etc.

Moderators: Curtis8, A_Null

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:48 am

Lol, right, it was 2008 ! Fixed :D
Thanks for the feedback.
Natan

Flow
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Feedback

Postby Flow » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:13 pm

Hey nice job on this 3.0, more serious now...
New kernel giving BIOS bug message but thats about it for the annoying part.
:wink:

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:22 am

lol ! :lol:

peacetocome
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:37 am

Re: Feedback

Postby peacetocome » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:40 am

I work for the University of Otago, New Zealand.

I have just gone through an exercise in using PING 3 (20090101) to distribute Window XP SP3 images to new machines using a menu system I imbeded within PING. From a beginning about four months ago, and knowing vitually nothing about Linux, to now and still not knowing much but having a great time with something that works as we had hoped.

I created a syspreped image of four different computers for distribution and these were placed on a network server (Windows 2003, I think). Witin "initrd.gz" I created four ".conf" files, one for each image, and a "ping.conf". I replaced the "rc.local" with a small change and introduced a bash file ("menui75.sh") to act as a menu.

The "rc.local" file is modified to call "menui75.sh" instead of "local.ping". When the "menui75.sh" is run the person selects an image and the "ping.conf" is replaced with the particular computer ".conf" file (renamed , of course) and then "re.ping" is called (which uses the "new" ping.conf).

Now for some comments.
When the program asks for a path to save/restore (and it is in the documentation as well) the example shows the DOS path structure eg \here\there. Whereas what is actually required is the Linux structure eg /here/there. For novices like me it is a real trap and hard to diagnose. I would appreciate this being fixed.

I have automated the reload so after the menu it should just reload to completion - but it doesn't. It stops at the page requesting the path to the image and pressing the "Enter" key is all that is required. I would prefer not to see this message.

The creation of the image to the file share only gives "owner" rights so I have to expand those rights so others can deploy the images. Not a major thing but this point could be added to your documentation to help other "newbies".

Cheers

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:20 pm

Hi Peacetocome,

peacetocome wrote:I work for the University of Otago, New Zealand.

I have just gone through an exercise in using PING 3 (20090101) to distribute Window XP SP3 images to new machines using a menu system I imbeded within PING. From a beginning about four months ago, and knowing vitually nothing about Linux, to now and still not knowing much but having a great time with something that works as we had hoped.


I'm glad you successfully used PING to meet your objectives.

peacetocome wrote:I created a syspreped image of four different computers for distribution and these were placed on a network server (Windows 2003, I think). Witin "initrd.gz" I created four ".conf" files, one for each image, and a "ping.conf". I replaced the "rc.local" with a small change and introduced a bash file ("menui75.sh") to act as a menu.

The "rc.local" file is modified to call "menui75.sh" instead of "local.ping". When the "menui75.sh" is run the person selects an image and the "ping.conf" is replaced with the particular computer ".conf" file (renamed , of course) and then "re.ping" is called (which uses the "new" ping.conf).


Yes, it's one way to do it. Maybe you could consider, in the future, setting the parameters into the pxelinux/default file. You can add several menu entries in that file, and enjoy a boot menu for the same result, without the pain of having to modify the PING image.

peacetocome wrote:Now for some comments.
When the program asks for a path to save/restore (and it is in the documentation as well) the example shows the DOS path structure eg \here\there. Whereas what is actually required is the Linux structure eg /here/there. For novices like me it is a real trap and hard to diagnose. I would appreciate this being fixed.


Sounds correct. Next release...

peacetocome wrote:I have automated the reload so after the menu it should just reload to completion - but it doesn't. It stops at the page requesting the path to the image and pressing the "Enter" key is all that is required. I would prefer not to see this message.


It can be suppressed, but I would need to see your settings (ping.conf contents).

peacetocome wrote:The creation of the image to the file share only gives "owner" rights so I have to expand those rights so others can deploy the images. Not a major thing but this point could be added to your documentation to help other "newbies".


For this matter, the choice was made not to give too much doc, because it's no more a PING topic. What is always recommended is to start the easy way (open sharing), then customize more. Others share folders using Samba on unix systems, and might want doc too about this... I'd rather stay out :)

peacetocome wrote:Cheers


Thanks for your feedback.
Regards
Natan

Dnk
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:57 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Dnk » Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:20 am

Currently, I am preparing a pre-configured bootable CD to make images of 20 workstations on a network share. I am quite happy with PING so far, but I am trying to reduce the not-so-computerminded-user-unfriendliness to a minimum.

I have modified rc.ping (3.00.01, version date 2008-01-09), below I have copied a couple of lines (starting at line number 312).
I am not familiar with perl, but as a C++/SQL-programmer I felt confident to move the closing bracket of a blockstatement further down.
My object was to disable the waiting for input when No_Shell=Y when working with a preset configuration.
I ran the modified script and it worked fine for me. However, I have not verified if there are consequences for other configurations.

I have not yet found out how to reduce the logging-output to screen...

I congratulate you with your product and wish you the best.

The lines from the script:

Code: Select all

# Give the user a chance to avoid this script.
#
system("clear");
print "\n$VERSION_LINUX\n";
print "\n***       PING (Partimage Is Not Ghost) -- $VERSION $VERSION_DATE        ***\n";
print "***           Get doc and latest release on PING website             ***\n";
print "***                  http://ping.windowsdream.com/                   ***\n";
print "***                                                                  ***\n";
print "***    PING is brought to you by EFFITEK -- http://www.effitek.fr    ***\n";
unless($P{No_Shell})
{
    print "\n";
    print ">> Type [ENTER] to go on with the PING interface, or x to get a shell <<\n";
    print ">> (login as root, no passwd needed). Type h to get basic shell help. <<\n";
#20090324 Dnk, next closing bracket moved further down (line 362)
#}
  print "\n>> ";


  # If a CD/DVD/USB device has been booted, raise no question if a file
  # called 'AUTO' (case-sensitive) is found on the root of the CD/DVD/USB dev.
  #
  # This method is deprecated, and we ensure backward compatibility here.
  #
  if($SRC =~/cdrom/ && -e "/mnt/cdrom/AUTO")
  {
      LOG("* /cdrom/AUTO file found! No exit possibility given to the user.\n");
      $P{AUTO} = 1;
  }

  unless(defined($P{AUTO}) && $P{AUTO})
  {
      my $Grab = <STDIN>;
      if($Grab =~/^h/i && ! $P{No_Shell})
      {
    Print_Shell_Help();
    print "\n>> ";
    $Grab = <STDIN>;
      }
      if($Grab =~/^skip/i)
      {
    LOG("* Skip keyword! Erasing all data passed from kernel params/ping.conf\n");
    %P = ();
      }
      if($Grab =~/^x/i && ! $P{No_Shell})
      {
    exit;
      }
  }
#20090324 Dnk, next closing bracket moved down from further up (line 327)
}

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:12 pm

Might use as well the AUTO=Y param...

Regards
Natan

Dnk
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:57 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Dnk » Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:03 pm

I understood that with AUTO=Y no questions are asked at all. I want to enter the partitions to be backupped and the name of his computer.
It surprised me that when NoShell=Y the question is no longer asked, but the perl script still expects an answer. Hence my modification.

User avatar
ternarybit
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Feedback

Postby ternarybit » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:27 pm

Natan,

Thanks again for a great utility. I've heard a few people touting Clonezilla as a superior project. In fact it is a very good utility. I still use PING at work though, and here's why:

- Much easier PXE setup (wtf? drbl? no thanks)
- Pain-free CD/DVD restore disc creation
- Very easy to configure with ping.conf and even modify rc.ping to suit my needs
- Not bloated
- Fairly capable bash environment

With that said, I would like to see a few features if at all possible:

- Image verification (md5, sha1). At least SOME confirmation that the image creation succeeded or failed (and possibly a summary of statistics, etc). Sorting through x.log gets tedious
- I still have to manually resize NTFS parts about 60% of the time. This is probably ntfsresize's fault, but maybe you can find a more reliable way

Great work again. There's a reason it's called "Partimage is NOT Ghost," and don't ever let it become like Ghost. Thank you Thank you!!!

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:44 am

Thanks Ternarybit !
We'll try to improve... and keep it simple, for everyday-use.
Regards
Natan

Jean
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:22 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Jean » Tue Oct 06, 2009 1:18 pm

Ping just saved me from lots of work after a driver install messed up my system (gave a bsod halfway the install :twisted: ). Everything went ok and I was back up in minutes. Only thing confusing was the question about resizing partitions, I decided to answerk No and that seemed to be the right choice, I couldn't find anything about it in the docs, my mistake?
Anyway, thanks again, it really works.

Wyoguy
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:27 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Wyoguy » Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:02 pm

Purpose of "Re-Sizing Partitions"

If you save an image of a 2 GB partition and then try to restore it to a 3GB partition on another drive, it will work because it fits nicely.

If you save an image of a 3 GB partition and then try to restore it to a 2 GB partition, you may have an issue because it does not fit.

In actuality both of the above partitions may only be using 1.1 GB. So, if we resize the partition down to what the partition is actually using (1.1 GB) before we create the image, then this image could be restored to any size partition that is 1.1GB or larger.

Of course, after restoring the image, we need to make sure that the "ntfsresize" is ran after restoring to correctly upsize the partition-table information to match the size of the partition.

Most of this is done for you automatically when you select "yes" to resize. Sometimes (in version 3.0) you will need to run the ntfsresize manually if it hiccups when it was supposed to run.

As a general rule of thumb... If you are saving your image to restore back onto your same drive (same partition) do NOT select image shrink. If you are saving the image to roll out on many computers, then, sure go ahead and shrink the image first.

jerusalem1
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:00 pm

Re: Feedback

Postby jerusalem1 » Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:33 pm

Anybody still here ? :lol:

User avatar
Natan
Site Admin
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:29 am

Re: Feedback

Postby Natan » Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:44 pm

Sure :D
Very busy, as never ever before indeed, but still here, boy !

theopract
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Russia, Moscow

Re: Feedback

Postby theopract » Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:00 am

Hi there,
I'm not sure everyone here came with the same issue. I'm wishing to release a new version of PING before 2010 :D
What should be added exactly concerning CCISS devices ?
Thanks !!
Natan

Hello, Natan! You were going to release a new version as I remember ;)
When are you going to make us happy?


Return to “PING / General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest