Jean McCormack wrote: > I've updated the webrev to reflect this decision. I'm assuming if anyone > had issues they would > have told me by now. > > COMPRESSION_TYPE is a required parameter and it's existence is checked > in verify_conf which executes in the beginning. The values of > COMPRESSION_TYPE > are checked via the invocation of lofiadm out of the DIST_PROTO area > when you're > actually compressing solaris.zlib. When checkpointing goes in > eventually this won't > be a burden. Short term, it may be. > > Addresses: > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=1125 > > Webrev: > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~jeanm/distro_constructor/ >
The problem I see is that we lose any other possible diagnostics that come out of lofiadm. How about always cat'ing the contents of lofi_out_str? Dave > Jean > > Jean McCormack wrote: >> Dave Miner wrote: >> >>> Channing Lovely wrote: >>> >>>> As I said before, I am fine with your code changes. I am pretty sure >>>> that introducing some weird checking into the DC code is probably >>>> not the way to go. However, we need to do something. The DC page on >>>> opensolaris.org says >>>> >>>> In order to use the Distribution Constructor, you must have >>>> installed Solaris Nevada build 71 or a later build on your system. >>>> >>>> and that is clearly not true anymore. The SXDE 1/08 won't work >>>> (based on 79b) for several reasons, and preview 2 will probably fail >>>> due to the SUNWclofi issue. I think the main page on opensolaris.org >>>> needs to be updated, and there should be a bug against the man page >>>> for lofiadm. >>>> >>> You have the rights to modify the opensolaris page, so use them if >>> you see something that isn't right. >>> >>> I suggest these choices: >>> >>> - Eliminate the validation of this parameter, let it fail if it's >>> wrong when that point in the build is reached >>> >> Without checkpoints this could be painful for the user. But probably >> the least frustrating for the user. Once checkpoints go in, it's not a >> big >> deal to have the build fail here. >> >>> - Only issue a warning if Jean's proposed validation fails >>> >> With the number of messages we spew to the screen in the IPS retrieval >> and the gnome stuff I hesitate to do this. I'm afraid it will >> get lost in the cruft. If we can get rid of some of those messages, >> this might be nice. But it would be confusing to see this warning and >> then later everything works fine. >> >>> - Require that the build system have a version of lofiadm which >>> supports the compression we want (potentially at a configurable >>> path); in which case, we'd use that one to build and not the one we >>> install in the proto area. >>> >>> >> My concern here is whether or not people can upgrade their SUNWclofi >> package. So then we need to supply a configurable path which just seems >> like yet another parameter for the user to think about. Doesn't seem >> important enough for that. >> >> So I don't like any of my choices. But I think I dislike 1 the least. >> Clay agreed and I didn't even lead him down that path. He actually >> liked combining >> 1 and 2. >> >>> Jean, your testing is suspect here: lines 113 and 114 in >>> build_dist.lib don't agree on what path is being used. >>> >> Actually there are 2 bugs here that made things appear to work when I >> tested them. As you noted, I have conflicting paths. Unfortunately, >> my testing didn't find this because neither one is defined and thus >> defaults to /temp. I've figured out why. >> >> >> >> Jean >> _______________________________________________ >> caiman-discuss mailing list >> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss >> >
