Last week, I had the opportunity to travel to Oslo, Norway, to participate in an OS X workshop for the various public universities in Norway. The idea is for the universities to cooperate on developing best practices and procedures for managing OS X machines in the Norwegian universities, and this workshop was a step toward that goal. I was invited to participate to provide a different perspective and share some of my expertise in/knowledge of/experience with various aspects of Mac OS X management.
The workshop was hosted by the University of Oslo, and took place in their brand-new Department of Informatics building. Very modern, and very Scandinavian in its way.
The first day of the three-day workshop was conducted in Norwegian; but that was my “recover from jet lag day”, so I did not meet up with the workshop participants until the evening at an Irish pub — The Dubliner. Topics and tools covered that day included DeployStudio, InstaDMG, and Puppet. While the workshop participants explored these things, I explored the city center of Oslo. I particularly enjoyed the National Gallery and standing inches from works of art like Rodin’s The Thinker and Munch’s The Scream.
The following days of the conference were conducted (mostly) in English. I spoke a lot the second day, presenting on topics like the systems environment at my place of business, managing clients using MCX, the Apple package format, packaging tools, and of course, Munki. Other presenters looked at The Luggage, Joe Block’s packaging tool and Gary Larriza’s recipes for The Luggage. There was also a mention of pymacadmin.
The third day, the workshop participants broke into smaller groups and attempted to create things based on what we had discovered and learned the previous two days. For example, one group created a customized install of Adobe CS5 Design Premium and another group worked on a customized install of Microsoft Office 2011 (excluding Outlook, Communicator, and Messenger). Still other groups created packages to install a Norwegian (Bokmål) language dictionary and a customized install of Adobe Acrobat X (minus the web plugin).
In all of the tasks that involved creating customized installs of existing packages, we avoided repackaging, instead choosing to use ChoiceChangesXML files or editing the Distribution files (and for the Adobe CS5 suite, using AAMEE 1.2 to build the installation “package”).
All of these packages were tested for automated install using Munki, which was gratifying and terrifying at the same time. Live demonstrations in front of people is always where unexpected bugs show up, but Munki was (mostly) well-behaved this time. We discovered some complexities and pitfalls of modifying packages, using PackageMaker, and using Munki with customized installs.
I think overall, the workshop was a success. Participants learned about some of the management tools available to OS X administrators, got some “hands-on” opportunity to work with these tools, and began the process of figuring out how they could help each other by sharing techniques, processes, and even share actual packages if possible.
Evenings were spent sampling Oslo restaurants. I had excellent dinners at Kampen Bistro and Oslo Spiseforretning. On Friday, I had a chance to visit the broadcast facilities of NRK, the Norwegian National Broadcasting network, and the Holmenkollen Ski Jump, where the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships are being held this week and next. http://www.oslo2011.no/ has more information.
Lunch at the Holmenkollen Restaurant included reindeer steak, which was excellent.
Thanks to Thomas Hansen from the University of Oslo (UiO) for inviting me and serving as an excellent host. Also thanks to Jan Ivar Beddari from the University of Bergen, Anders Bruvik and Frank Paul Silye of UiO, Dag Tore Antonsen from NRK (the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation) for guiding me around the city and sharing some of their time. I enjoyed my conversations with many of the other workshop participants as well! It’s always interesting to get new perspectives, as well as discuss the common challenges we all face.
I’m hoping to meet up with many of my new Norwegian friends again at MacSysAdmin 2011 in Göteborg (Gothenburg), Sweden.
A few pictures:
Flash Dance
August 24, 2012In comments on my previous post here, TGB makes some interesting points:
Most, if not all the items mentioned (Adium, Mactracker, Firefox, and Chrome) are distributed as “drag-n-drop” disk images where the user is expected to drag the application to the /Applications folder. I’d argue that is an industry standard deployment method. The software deployment system I use (Munki) can install items like this without the need to package them. If your software deployment mechanism does not, perhaps you should be requesting that feature from your vendor, since this is a very common distribution format, and code-wise, requires little effort to support. When a new version of Firefox or Chrome comes out, I just download the disk image and directly import it into Munki — no packaging needed.
Adobe Flayer Player cannot be distributed as a drag-n-drop application disk image — it’s not an application. So the “correct” distribution format for this software is the Apple package format.
Preferred default settings is a completely different issue. As long as vendors use Apple’s preference file format, this is solved with MCX or Lion/Mountain Lion profiles.
TGB also writes:
Flash is not needed by any business-critical application where I work, yet our users demand (or at least expect) it and Apple and Mozilla demand it stay up-to-date, or they will disable the plug-in. So for us at least, testing is quite minimal for Flash. If it installs and can display some Flash content, it’s good.
But yes, I do understand and sympathize with admins that must test each release of Flash with business-critical applications — and Adobe’s distribution format is not the key issue here; frequency of releases is. I’d argue that this is an impetus to reduce or eliminate your internal dependency on Flash.
Where I disagree with TGB: Adobe’s non-standard distribution adds more than a “couple of minutes” to preparing a new release of Flash for enterprise distribution. If we could be sure that Adobe will never change anything about their installer and updater, we could just figure out a process and repeat it for each new release. But Adobe can and has changed things, so for each release we must also test that our packaging/repackaging/custom deployment steps actually end up with the desired results. This is usually not a huge deal, but also cannot be ignored. But more importantly, theirs is a one-off solution. If we have to keep track of and test different deployment solutions for each vendor and product, we end up wasting a lot of time and effort, and making a lot of mistakes. Where would it end? Unique software deployment methods for each vendor? (Oh that there was only ONE unique deployment method for Adobe software!)
No, a line must be drawn. Here. No farther.
Categories: Adobe, Commentary, Deployment, MCX, OS X, Packaging
Comments: 14 Comments