On 31.05.2012 [16:11:32 -0300], Cleber Rosa wrote: > 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.
Thanks for the review! > So, I can work on this by the beginning of next week, or maybe sooner. Ok, maybe I can work on this today. Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan <[email protected]> IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
