Packages resource support for RedHat #1487
Conversation
test/helper.rb
Outdated
| "dpkg-query -W -f='${db:Status-Abbrev} ${Package} ${Version}\\n'" => cmd.call('dpkg-query-W'), | ||
| # rpm query all packages | ||
| "rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\\n'" => cmd.call('rpm-qa-queryformat'), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need multiple spaces between name and version? better '%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\\n'
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can see why he's doing it... but is there another character that is guaranteed to not be part of a RPM package name and version string that we can use as the delimiter instead? If not, I'm fine with the two spaces since that character combo should never be in a name or version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Exactly, I played the paranoid here to avoid splitting on a space in package name or version. I'm fine with two spaces as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am okay with taking that approach right now. We should document it in code to make other developers aware of the intended use of the whitespace
lib/resources/packages.rb
Outdated
| os = inspec.os | ||
| if os.debian? | ||
| @pkgs = Debs.new(inspec) | ||
| elsif %w{redhat suse amazon fedora}.include?(os[:family]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we use os.redhat?? Otherwise this will not work on scientific or oracle linux
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I used the same checks as the existing package resource:
elsif %w{redhat suse amazon fedora}.include?(os[:family])
@pkgman = Rpm.new(inspec)Noticed that os.redhat? is not matching Fedora:
inspec> os.redhat?
=> false
inspec> os.params
=> {:name=>"fedora", :family=>"fedora", :release=>"25", :arch=>"x86_64"}If we go with os.redhat?, will need something like:
lib/resources/grub_conf.rb
35: if os.redhat? || os[:name] == 'fedora'
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @alexpop yes os.redhat? || os[:name] == 'fedora' sounds right and we should apply this to the package resource as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about these?
inspec> os.redhat?
=> false
inspec> os.params
=> {:name=>"amazon", :family=>"amazon", :release=>"2016.09", :arch=>"x86_64"}inspec> os.redhat?
=> false
inspec> os.params
=> {:name=>"suse", :family=>"suse", :release=>"11.4", :arch=>"x86_64"}There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I know, Suse is using YAST and zypper. Lets add support for those systems seperately.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Works for amazon linux:
[root@ip-172-31-12-168 ~]# rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n'
sysvinit 2.87-6.dsf.15.amzn1
kbd-misc 1.15-11.4.amzn1
rubygem20-json 1.8.3-1.51.amzn1
glibc-common 2.17-106.168.amzn1and SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12:
ip-172-31-10-176:~ # rpm -qa --queryformat '%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n'
nfs-client 1.3.0-26.3
sle-module-legacy-release 12-6.2
python-oauthlib 0.7.2-2.3
libwbclient0 4.4.2-29.4
procps 3.3.9-7.1
python-colorama 0.2.7-1.9There was a problem hiding this comment.
@alexpop I agree with you. Lets add support for those systems, too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in this case, do I make the condition:
if os.redhat? || %w{suse amazon fedora}.include?(os[:family])There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd love it if we could align a bit more with Chef/Ohai in terms of platform / os / platform_family so it's not confusing for our users. Not something to address in this PR, but perhaps something we can consider for a future enhancement. Curious as to your thoughts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks fine to me. I echo the feedback from @chris-rock as well.
Fix dpkg trimming of first line Signed-off-by: Alex Pop <apop@chef.io>
…fileds delimited Signed-off-by: Alex Pop <apop@chef.io>
alexpop
force-pushed
the
ap/packages-redhat
branch
from
63d18f1
to
88975bf
Compare
|
Gents, updated and rebased based on the discussions above. |
processessupport for RedHat is needed to support the new CIS SCAP profiles.Also fixes dpkg trimming of first line.