Bug 1414344

Summary:	Wrong message after regeneration kickstart file
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Tereza Cerna <tcerna>
Component:	preupgrade-assistant	Assignee:	Michal Bocek <mbocek>
Status:	CLOSED WORKSFORME	QA Contact:	Alois Mahdal <amahdal>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	6.9	CC:	mbocek, ovasik, phracek
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Extras
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	No Doc Update
Doc Text:	undefined	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-03-11 17:20:55 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Comment 2 Michal Bocek 2017-02-21 22:57:59 UTC

Resolved by upstream commit: https://github.com/upgrades-migrations/preupgrade-assistant/commit/a01f099a2b4237e267d902c5e7e3d437e8710ca3

Comment 4 Alois Mahdal 2017-03-10 03:09:18 UTC

I cannot reproduce this.

This was originally found in 2.2.1-1.el5.  On el6 channel, the last version is 2.1.10-6.el6, so my guess is that the problematic code was never released.

Michal, can you please confirm if that is the case?  If so, I would propose dropping this from erratum and closing it (there is nothing to fix from RHEL6 customer POV).  Otherwise, please provide hint how to reproduce this on RHEL6.

Comment 5 Michal Bocek 2017-03-10 16:07:43 UTC

Alois, to reproduce this in 2.1.10-6.el6, make sure you have "autopart" in /root/anaconda-ks.cfg - it serves as a basis for the generated kickstart.

When generating kickstart the "part" commands were always added no matter whether there was "autopart" already or not.

Comment 6 Alois Mahdal 2017-03-10 18:03:03 UTC

Sorry, this does not work: 2.1.10 still passes, no errors seen.

(It did work for bug 1414341, where I have asked very similar question; sorry if I made it confusing.)

Comment 7 Michal Bocek 2017-03-11 17:20:55 UTC

Ok, it's possible that this bug, describing different results when executing the same command twice, is related to a development version of the Preupgrade Assistant. I have no other ideas on how to reproduce it. I'll close and drop it from the Erratum.