New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fixes #29110 - updated fact parser to handle v3 debian OS #7482
Merged
tbrisker
merged 2 commits into
theforeman:develop
from
lzap:debian-fact-parsing-v3-29110
May 3, 2020
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right now it's hard to see what the benefit is. I assume you want to change
Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)
intoDebian 10.3
but I'm wondering if that's needed. Debian has dropped the use of minor versions since a few releases. Is there a reason we want to divert from the OS? Does the description column need to be unique?Could you also add a test case for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Description was previously "Debian 10", with the change it's gonna be "Debian 10.3".
Uniquness is a good question, I'd say yes we want it to be unique because that's the field we show in lists. You do not want to see this:
I vaguely remember that this field is preferred because users want to define their own naming convention e.g. RHEL 7.7 instead RedHat 7.7. So generally speaking, i'd rather keep them unique and do this patch than doing a big change on that.
We actually follow the same naming scheme for Red Hat systems and it makes sense to me. Every minor release of RHEL (I assume Debian too) has a installable tree (kickstart). To be able to install from different version trees, you actually need two OS entries otherwise you'd need to change minor version before every provisioning.
I will add a test case for this of couse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ekohl wait there is a test already, can you elaborate what you want me to do?
https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/pull/7482/files#diff-f6c009374a71e00e01084f53f35f47ba