Bug 1031525
| Summary: | inconsistent locations of upgrade.img | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Daniel Mach <dmach> |
| Component: | lorax | Assignee: | Brian Lane <bcl> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 7.0 | CC: | dmach, wwoods |
| 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: | 2014-01-15 19:47:03 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: | |||
|
Description
Daniel Mach
2013-11-18 08:12:40 UTC
upgrade.img isn't product.img, it is used by redhat-update so it's up to Will. But really, at this point we shouldn't be moving locations unless something is broken. (In reply to Brian C. Lane from comment #1) > But really, at this point we shouldn't be moving locations unless something > is broken. Agreed. That's why I proposed this for RC and we shouldn't touch it before Beta. Yeah, the inconsistent layout is goofy and I'd like to make every arch use the same locations for vmlinuz/initrd.img/upgrade.img. The .treeinfo file is supposed to be the canonical reference for the locations of these images, so we should be able to change the paths without breaking anything.. so long as it uses .treeinfo, anyway. There used to be other things that use those paths (the forth stuff in the ppc hybrid images had it hardcoded IIRC), but I'm not aware of others right now. If you want to work toward having kernel/initrd/upgrade.img in a consistent location for all arches, I'd definitely support that. So come up with a plan of action and let's give it a shot! sorry, wrong $SUBJ I really meant upgrade images. Time to decide if we want to do this for 7.0 GA, postpone, or close. Given the pm_score and current date, I am voting for closing this out entirely. Well. I'd *like* to have consistent layout, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.
Here's the balance, as I see it:
Pro:
* Consistency / predictability between arches
* Simpler lorax templates
Con:
* More migration effort for people not using .treeinfo
* Some naming quirks might actually have technical reasons behind them, which
we would need to fix (e.g. why is the kernel named "kernel.img" on s390x?)
If do we decide it's worth the effort, I'd suggest something like:
images/vmlinuz
images/vmlinuz-${flavor}
images/initrd.img
images/initrd-${flavor}.img
images/upgrade.img
images/upgrade-${flavor}.img
Or:
images/generic/vmlinuz
images/generic/initrd.img
images/generic/upgrade.img
images/${flavor}/vmlinuz
images/${flavor}/initrd.img
images/${flavor}/upgrade.img
The latter seems cleaner to me. But the question remains: is it worth the effort?
I think we should leave things as-is for RHEL7 and first do this in Fedora. Agreed, setting devel_ack- per comment #7. Development Management has reviewed and declined this request. You may appeal this decision by reopening this request. |