I see. With drive space so cheap I am considering installing more OSes that way, i.e. copy OS CDs to local HD, reboot to start install from local HD. However using kickstart is a bit cumbersome for our needs. We get greater flexibility building our own net boot images to do the same. We are looking at systemimager to provide that frame work. The new systemimager supports multicast. I can then push out windows or linux CDs to 100's of nodes in minutes, then start the local install using unique rules obtained via NFS or HTTP and continue to use the native installer. > -----Original Message----- > From: kickstart-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:kickstart-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Rowlands > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:06 AM > To: kickstart-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: Kickstarting Windows > > > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Egan Ford wrote: > > >I see no value kickstarting windows. IMHO, the best > installer for any > >OS is the native installer. Work that you do to rollout > Windows (e.g. > >with unattended.sourceforge.net) can be easily adapted as newer > >versions appear. You probably already know that about kickstart. > >Very easy to adapter to a newer/different OS that also uses > kickstart. > > You're missing the point. Levering Kickstart allows me to use all the > storage and network drivers supported by Linux, plus all the scripting > available in python to do customization, on diverse hardware > which makes > imaging solutions difficult. > > The "kickstart" part of the process simply refers to getting all > necessary files to the host, and writing unattend.txt. Windows' own > setup.exe does the real install. > > Other auto-installers for Windows simply do not have all the features, > except perhaps for RIS, which I can't use because I don't > want an Active > Directory setup. > > > Cheers, > Phil > > > _______________________________________________ > Kickstart-list mailing list > Kickstart-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/kickstart-list >
