On 05/31/2012 04:04 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > Hi Cleber, > > On 30.05.2012 [19:55:20 -0300], Cleber Rosa wrote: >> On 05/30/2012 07:52 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: >>> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 19:49 -0300, Cleber Rosa wrote: >>>> On 05/30/2012 06:48 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 14:41 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: >>>>>> On 30.05.2012 [18:26:58 -0300], Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 14:23 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 26.05.2012 [18:03:31 -0300], Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 16:31 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Sometimes there are firewalls between test machines and the greater >>>>>>>>>> Internet, so it seems unwise to depend upon external network access >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> the boottool/grubby building code. But some sites won't have those >>>>>>>>>> restrictions. Add the ability to configure a local mirror for the >>>>>>>>>> grubby >>>>>>>>>> tarball in the CLIENT section, but default to the external location. >>>>>>>>> The problem with this patch is that makes boottool dependent on >>>>>>>>> autotest >>>>>>>>> libraries, when the script itself is sometimes used in a stand alone >>>>>>>>> fashion. Therefore, I can't accept this as is. >>>>>>>> Ah makes sense. I didn't realize boottool was used stand-alone, sorry. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cleber, I believe we should try to locate and download boottool from >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> copy present in the autotest tree, before trying to reach out to >>>>>>>>> github. >>>>>>>>> What do you say? >>>>>>>> Ah I didn't even realize there was one in client/deps/grubby -- so, >>>>>>>> would we try and push it out with the rest of autotest? I'm not sure >>>>>>>> pulling will work, as the client/deps/grubby path isn't guaranteed (nor >>>>>>>> is it setup to be, afaict) part of the web-exposed path. >>>>>>> This is what I'd like to do, find a way to ensure the grubby tarball >>>>>>> gets copied when the client is installed. This way we wouldn't ever have >>>>>>> to resort to an external copy. >>>> Well, did you guys miss the response I posted a couple of days ago? >>>> Copying it again: >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> On client mode that is definitely the best thing to do. But that would >>>> fail on server mode. >>>> >>>> I suggest that boottool looks for the grubby tarball on those locations: >>>> >>>> 1) current directory (would solve server mode if we also send the >>>> tarball to the client) >>>> 2) autotest source tree >>>> 3) remote github uri >>>> >>>> How does that sound? >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> So, adding that to the rsync'd path list sounds like implementing #2. #1 >>>> is still needed, and number #3 is a fallback that may be skipped. >>>> >>>> Are we all on the same page here? >>> Yes, we are, implementing 1) and 2) is exactly what I had in mind. >>> >> OK, great! I guess there was a bit of miscommunication my part. /me >> glad that we all share the same point of view. > Sorry for not replying to your other e-mail -- I've had some power > issues at home. I agree we are in agreement :) > > Are you working on implementing any of this?
*Right now* I'm focusing on giving your cobbler integration patchset a last set of tests, which I hope will be done by tomorrow. BTW, sorry for taking that long to review/test/commit it. PTO and moving home had an played a role in the delay. So, I can work on this by the beginning of next week, or maybe sooner. Cheers! CR. > > Thanks, > Nish > _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
