[Libosinfo] command-line should come from Libosinfo

[Fabiano Fidêncio]

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
<zeeshanak at gnome.org>wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano at fidencio.org>
> wrote:
> > Howdy!
>
> Hi Fabiano,
>

Hi Zeeshan,


>
> > Since we start using libosinfo to provide the install-scripts for
> > gnome-boxes we have a pending task related to the command-line passed to
> > load the install-script.
> > Nowadays, the command-line hardcoded for Fedora format and it is okay,
> once
> > we only support unattended-installations for Fedora's flavors of Linux.
> But
> > the family is growing fast, fortunately.
> >
> > A few days ago Zeeshan found out how the unattended-installations work on
> > Debian/Ubuntu. A few hours ago I found out how it works for OpenSuSE.
> >
> > So, our current cases are:
> > - Fedora/RHEL/CentOS: ks=hd:<device>:/<filename>
> > - OpenSuSE: autoyast=device://<device>/autoinst.xml
> > - Debian/Ubuntu: decompress the initrd, put the file into it, compress
> again
> > and boot with this fresh compressed initrd.
> >
> > The 3rd method is also supported by Fedora/RHEL/CentOS, but is not by
> > OpenSuSE).
> > Ah, so bad, looks like we don't have a standard way to follow.
>
> One important thing to note is that according to the documentation,
> the same method we use for Fedora should also work for Debian/Ubuntu
> so this initrd repacking method is a work around to a bug. We should
> file a bug on Debian/Ubuntu about this and use this workaround in Apps
> for now. Libosinfo should simply provide working installer scripts for
> Debian/Ubuntu.
>

I don't know if it's supposed to work in the same way that Fedora does.
After your successfully with Debian I re-read the docs and they are not
exactly clear about that. I could understand that the expected file is the
new initrd, with the preseed file.


>
> > I'm going to add OpenSuSE install-scripts for Libosinfo and I think we
> will
> > want to use these scripts on Boxes.
>
> Yup. Sounds right.
>
> > Thinking a bit here, at least for Fedora* and OpenSuSE, we could add a
> > property in the install-scripts, "command-line-format" to specify the
> > format. Something contenting:
> > - installation method (ks, autoyast) -- could be represented by "!"
>
> What would '!' say to app? Do they substitute it with 'ks' or
> 'autoyast'? Why not just give them 'ks' or 'autoyast' itself?
>

Answered above, my bad.


> > - installation method option (hd, device) - could be represented by "@"
>
> Again why use a variable and how does app know what it means for each
> script/os?
>


Same here.


>
> > - device where the script will be put in (sda, sdb) - could be
> represented
> > by "#"
>
> Now is this something that really should come from app but thing is
> that app is already providing this in installer config.
>
> What I suggest is that we also use XSL template (just like the script
> template) for generating this commandline for the app. App will pass
> the same install config as it will for generation of scripts.
>

I will try to draft something in this way in the next days and then I will
return to this discussion with a patch. I think the things are clear enough
to start a draft
Thank you.

Best Regards,
-- 
Fabiano Fidêncio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/attachments/20130408/bb32a247/attachment.htm>