fixes #9358 - match unattended template requests against provision interface #2172
Conversation
| @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ def set_nic_attributes(host, attributes, evaluator) | |||
| factory :nic_primary_and_provision, :parent => :nic_managed, :class => Nic::Managed do | |||
| primary true | |||
| provision true | |||
| sequence(:mac) { |n| "01:23:45:ab:" + n.to_s(16).rjust(4, '0').insert(2, ':') } | |||
| sequence(:mac) { |n| "01:23:67:ab:" + n.to_s(16).rjust(4, '0').insert(2, ':') } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
collision with another NIC factory
…ovision interface
domcleal
force-pushed
the
9358-unattended-interface
branch
from
685516e
to
31407c4
Compare
| factory :coreos, class: Coreos do | ||
| association :media, :architecture, :ptables |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These simply don't work, it only works on a 1-1 relationship, not 1-many. None of these factories were actually used until I attempted to use debian7_0.
|
👍 , maybe it'd be helpful to fall back on the primary interface in case the provision_interface is not available (could've been removed, unreachable...) <- @ares @GregSutcliffe I'll merge so we get this right at least for the moment, please open a Redmine issue if you think what I mention above makes sense. |
|
Yeah, I was wondering about whether we should match all interfaces rather than one specifically.. |
|
@domcleal if you plan to do some more improvements here, mac and ip is probably not a matching criteria as it might not be unique, we should keep tokens as the only option I think |
|
I don't really plan to, sorry. I had considered some sort of longer-term token for use in the boot disks, but don't really know, not thought about it much. |
No description provided.