Hide Forgot
Description of problem: I'm using a network proxy to call libguestfs' python interface (specifically: rpyc), and sfdisk rejects its list look-alike It can be solved very simply by changing the code like: - return libguestfsmod.sfdisk (self._o, device, cyls, heads, sectors, lines) + return libguestfsmod.sfdisk (self._o, device, cyls, heads, sectors, list(lines)) It won't affect existing code, and it will accept any iterable instead of throwing a RuntimeError. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
Since RHEL 6.1 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as exception or blocker. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Upstream commit: http://git.annexia.org/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=afa17809599f3ebc82c3feef025ca812fb26c9fe
dev-ack+ for 6.2.
QA are telling me in other bugs that they don't want to do any more changes to libguestfs for 6.1.
https://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/taskinfo?taskID=3462253
This is the reproducing python script: $ cat sfdisk-test.py import guestfs g=guestfs.GuestFS() g.add_drive('test.img') g.launch() trip=('1,100,83', '102,60,83', '200,50,83') g.sfdisk('/dev/sda',0,0,0, trip) $ truncate -s 1G test.img $ python sfdisk-test.py -- (outputs from libguestfs-1.7.17-17.el6) Using CPU model "cpu64-rhel6" Traceback (most recent call last): File "sfdisk.py", line 7, in <module> g.sfdisk('/dev/sda',0,0,0, trip) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/guestfs.py", line 1684, in sfdisk return libguestfsmod.sfdisk (self._o, device, cyls, heads, sectors, lines) RuntimeError: expecting a list parameter -- (outputs from libguestfs-1.7.17-19.el6) Using CPU model "cpu64-rhel6" -- resulting part table layout of -19 can be verified with sfdisk_l using guestfish.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1512.html