Bug 743331

Summary: anaconda creates invalid entry in anaconda-ks.cfg
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Mark J Strawcutter <mjstraw>
Component: anacondaAssignee: Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Release Test Team <release-test-team>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.1CC: rvykydal
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-04 16:51:42 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Mark J Strawcutter 2011-10-04 15:49:15 UTC 
Description of problem:

vanilla graphical install from CD produces anaconda-ks.cfg which contains:

repo --name="Red Hat Enterprise Linux"  --baseurl=cdrom:sr0 --cost=100

if used in subsequent kickstart install, can't find repo.  Manually changing to:

repo --name="Red Hat Enterprise Linux"  --baseurl=file:///mnt/source/ --cost=100

resolves the issue

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


How reproducible:

perform straight graphical install from CD, use resulting anaconda-ks.cfg for a kickstart install

Steps to Reproduce:
1. perform straight graphical install from CD
2. use resulting anaconda-ks.cfg for a kickstart install from CD
3.
  
Actual results:

kickstart install can't find repository

Expected results:

kickstart install uses repository on install CD

Additional info:
Comment 2 David Cantrell 2011-10-04 16:51:42 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 738577 ***
Comment 3 Mark J Strawcutter 2011-10-04 17:11:57 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 738577 ***

Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to view 738577 :-(
Comment 4 David Cantrell 2011-10-04 17:19:16 UTC 
Correct, bug #738577 contains confidential customer information.  Not my rules.
Comment 5 Mark J Strawcutter 2011-10-04 17:29:31 UTC 
(In reply to comment #4)
> Correct, bug #738577 contains confidential customer information.  Not my rules.

Is 738577 still open?  If closed - "how"?  errata?  next release?
Comment 6 Radek Vykydal 2011-10-13 08:33:30 UTC 
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Correct, bug #738577 contains confidential customer information.  Not my rules.
> 
> Is 738577 still open?  If closed - "how"?  errata?  next release?

It has been approved for fixing in RHEL 6.3.