Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Description of problem:
- rename the vmlinuz0 to vmlinuz-rhevh
- initrd0.img to initrd0-rhevh.img
This would better support pre-existing pxe environments.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEv-H 6.2 beta4
How reproducible:
always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.follow the hypervisor deployment guide
2.
3.
Actual results:
image names are generic
Expected results:
image names that reflect the distribuion they represent
Additional info:
Came in as a request from the OUG
I have a feeling that while some people would appreciate this cosmetic naming change, other people would not. And given that, I think just keeping the status quo makes sense here. There's no real reason to change the names at this point.