Bug 513951

Summary:	Anaconda ignores value of RUNKS variable
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Jan Stodola <jstodola>
Component:	anaconda	Assignee:	David Cantrell <dcantrell>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.4	CC:	borgan, ddumas, maier
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	s390x
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	anaconda-11.1.2.196-1	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	532897 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2010-03-30 08:01:56 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Jan Stodola 2009-07-27 09:45:47 UTC

Description of problem:
When RUNKS=0 is set in cmsconffile, anaconda ignores this value and runs noninteractive installation, but Installation Guide writes:

RUNKS=value
Where value is defined as 1 if you want to run the installation program in noninteractive (kickstart) mode in the 3270 terminal, or 0 otherwise. 

http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Installation_Guide/s1-s390-steps-vm.html


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
anaconda-11.1.2.190-1

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. insert RUNKS=0 into cmsconffile
2. start installation
  
Actual results:
Anaconda is running in noninteractive mode

Expected results:
Anaconda is running in interactive mode

Additional info:
The only way how to run installation in interactive mode is to remove RUNKS variable from cmsconffile.

Comment 3 Denise Dumas 2009-07-27 21:22:49 UTC

Starting at line 143 in linuxrc.s390, we have this:

    if [ -z "$RUNKS" ]; then
        echo
        echo $"Connect now to $IPADDR and login as user root to start the installation."
        echo $"E.g. using: ssh -X root@$IPADDR"
        read
        while : ; do
            /bin/sh --login
            [ $? = 0 ] || break
        done
    fi

That if test should read:

    if [ -z "$RUNKS" ] || [ "$RUNKS" = "0" ]; then

Or whatever the valid shell syntax is.  The new linuxrc.s390 assumes *any*
value in RUNKS means do a non-interactive install. Oops.

Comment 4 RHEL Program Management 2009-11-04 22:32:36 UTC

This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release.  Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products.  This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
release.

Comment 6 Jan Stodola 2010-01-29 09:28:08 UTC

Verified with RHEL5.5-Server-20100117.0 and anaconda-11.1.2.200-1.

Comment 7 Steffen Maier 2010-02-24 17:54:23 UTC

David's fix from http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/anaconda.git?p=anaconda.git;a=commitdiff;h=c01cbdfd5348bfc1c405fd5ae364e9db9510bd78;hp=7ee506c82f71eb048a473865579dd7febdadb903 is perfect. It automatically takes care of all the other occurrences of testing $RUNKS in linuxrc.

Just for completeness:

(In reply to comment #3)
> Or whatever the valid shell syntax is.  The new linuxrc.s390 assumes *any*
> value in RUNKS means do a non-interactive install. Oops.    

Which is exactly what the old linuxrc.s390 did, so no change nor regression introduced here. Only when I heard of the same bug for RHEL6, I realized that the install guide has always also said something different:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/anaconda-devel-list/2009-November/msg00156.html

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2010-03-30 08:01:56 UTC

An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2010-0194.html