Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1006113
anaconda unable to get update image
Last modified: 2013-09-16 11:28:03 EDT
Description of problem:
Do an install with "inst.updates=http://.../updates.img",
anaconda doesn't prepare the updates.img and copy its content to /tmp/updates
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
F20 Alpha TC5 (x86_64)
Steps to Reproduce:
1.Do an install with "inst.updates=http://.../updates.img",
2 When anaconda enter into the first install screen,Sent"Alt+F2" and cd into /tmp
3.As shown in the attachment,there is no updates
Created attachment 795814 [details]
Created attachment 795815 [details]
Created attachment 795816 [details]
Created attachment 795817 [details]
Created attachment 795826 [details]
which updates.img did you use? the one listed in the testcase? I don't think that's a valid updates.img anymore.
When I use one built earlier today, it works for my testing:
If this is a valid bug, it's probably a blocker. Proposing as a blocker for F20 alpha due to violation of the following F20 alpha release criterion :
The installer must be able to download and use an installer update image from an HTTP server.
(In reply to Tim Flink from comment #6)
> which updates.img did you use? the one listed in the testcase? I don't think
> that's a valid updates.img anymore.
> When I use one built earlier today, it works for my testing:
yes,the testcase one.I'm able to download it manually.what's more,I have asked others to test this with the testcase one,there is no this bug? in i386 install.hmmm,I feel a little confused now.
I have tested this case with the image you offered,and asked that one to test this case again.It turns out that you are right.BTW,I think it's necessary to update the image in that testcase,yes? :(
(In reply to lnie from comment #9)
> I have tested this case with the image you offered,and asked that one to
> test this case again.It turns out that you are right.BTW,I think it's
> necessary to update the image in that testcase,yes? :(
The updates.img in that testcase just 3 years old and the updates.img format has changed quite a bit since then.
I agree that we should probably update that updates.img, though
updates.img is unpacked to /run/install/updates
It was caused by outdated test case (updates.img used there was too old).