Bug 463425 - .discinfo version and .treeinfo version do not match
.discinfo version and .treeinfo version do not match
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: releng (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Dennis Gregorovic
Alexander Todorov
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2008-09-23 08:12 EDT by James Laska
Modified: 2013-09-02 02:27 EDT (History)
8 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-09-02 08:01:11 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description James Laska 2008-09-23 08:12:22 EDT
# curl http://porkchop.redhat.com/nightly/RHEL5.3-Server-20080919.nightly/tree-i386/.discinfo

Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 5.3

# curl http://porkchop.redhat.com/nightly/RHEL5.3-Server-20080919.nightly/tree-i386/.treeinfo

family = Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server
timestamp = 1221802175.49
totaldiscs = 1
version = 5
discnum = 1
packagedir = Server
arch = i386


Should the fix that changed the .discinfo version should be carried forward into the version in .treeinfo?
Comment 1 Dennis Gregorovic 2008-09-23 10:38:07 EDT
Just to clarify, is this what you would expect in .treeinfo?

family = Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server
timestamp = 1221802175.49
totaldiscs = 1
version = 5
update = 3
discnum = 1
packagedir = Server
arch = i386

Currently the .treeinfo file is created by anaconda and distill just copies it.  I could add logic to distill to tweak the .treeinfo file, but I would be in favor of making the change in anaconda itself.  What do you think?
Comment 2 James Laska 2008-09-23 10:48:47 EDT
I'd prefer keeping the existing fields (and not adding a new key 'update') ... but I know bpeck may want something different?

family = Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server
timestamp = 1221802175.49
totaldiscs = 1
version = 5.3

Yeah Dennis, I think you are right in that anaconda should just write the product info that is passed in to builddistro.  Is anaconda mk-images being supplied with the right information in order to write out the version string as noted above?  Or are additional parameters required?
Comment 3 Dennis Gregorovic 2008-09-23 11:01:46 EDT
I pass "--version '5'" to buildinstall.  I could modify that to 5.3 or include a new parameter.  If I just change it to "--version '5.3'" then we _may_ be able to get away without making any changes to buildinstall.  However, I don't know enough about the buildinstall scripts to say if that change would cause breakage elsewhere.
Comment 4 James Laska 2008-09-23 11:40:30 EDT
Adding jgranado@redhat.com as Joel instrumented the anaconda  .treeinfo parsing for RHEL5.2
Comment 5 Joel Andres Granados 2008-09-24 05:14:31 EDT
The "5.3" argument should be fine.  Be aware that you will also be changing the /root/.buildstamp file.
Comment 7 Bill Peck 2009-04-13 11:46:04 EDT
So far rhel5.4 builds are not showing the correct version.  Any ETA on this?

version = 5.4 would be fine
Comment 8 Dennis Gregorovic 2009-04-13 14:36:05 EDT
change checked into distill.
Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2009-09-02 08:01:11 EDT
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.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.