Created attachment 577835 [details] RH61x64 error How reproducible: Unable install new v7-1.5-18 test kit on RH6.2 and RH6.1 Steps to Reproduce: 1.Install RH6.1x64 2.Install V7-1.5-18 3.Type command line v7 plan Actual results: Unable to create v7 test plan Expected results: Create v7 test plan Additional info: [root@SUT-DL380G7 rh6_x64]# v7 plan found interface for udisks found device file /dev/sda found device file /dev/sdb Please verify the vendor, make, and model: Vendor: HP Make: ProLiant Model: ProLiant DL380 G7 Hardware: HP ProLiant ProLiant DL380 G7 OS: Santiago 6.1 Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/v7", line 45, in <module> success = v7.do(args) File "/usr/share/v7/lib/v7/hardwaretest.py", line 194, in do result = self.commands[self.command]() File "/usr/share/v7/lib/v7/hardwaretest.py", line 325, in doPlan self.doDiscover() File "/usr/share/v7/lib/v7/hardwaretest.py", line 249, in doDiscover self.catalog.getCertificationID(self.certification) File "/usr/share/v7/lib/v7/catalog.py", line 53, in getCertificationID if not self.isReachable(): File "/usr/share/v7/lib/v7/catalog.py", line 47, in isReachable print "Could not reach catalog server %s" % catalogServer NameError: global name 'catalogServer' is not defined [root@SUT-DL380G7 rh6_x64]# ^C
Created attachment 577837 [details] RH6.2x64 error
Created attachment 578078 [details] catalog.py patch fixing traceback when catalog is unreachable
*** Bug 813213 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
chau.nguyen2, akodenkiri, Are you able to continue after applying the patch in Comment #4? Thanks, -Rob From my testing the patch works but prompts for a certID where a "0" will get past this prompt (Bug #813405).
(In reply to comment #7) > chau.nguyen2, akodenkiri, > > Are you able to continue after applying the patch in Comment #4? > > Thanks, > > -Rob > > From my testing the patch works but prompts for a certID where a "0" will get > past this prompt (Bug #813405). Applying the patch will also cause the info test to fail the v7 validation step. This is expected behavior.
Hi Rob, Can you tell me how to apply this patch?. A brief steps will help a lot. -Akash
The file to be patched is /usr/share/v7/lib/v7/catalog.py Assuming you've saved the attachment to a file catalog.patch, the command to patch it would be: > patch /usr/share/v7/lib/v7/catalog.py catalog.patch Thanks!
I have followed your instruction to apply patch and it got applied without any issue.If i enter "v7 plan" i am not getting any crash but it asks us to enter Certification ID.I don't what certification ID has to enter here. There was no instruction to enter Certification ID on v1.4 kit.Is there any new step is required.? Please find attached "RHEL6_x64_patch.JPG" snapshot for more details -Akash
Created attachment 578351 [details] RHEL6_x64_Patch details
(In reply to comment #14) > I have followed your instruction to apply patch and it got applied without any > issue.If i enter "v7 plan" i am not getting any crash but it asks us to enter > Certification ID.I don't what certification ID has to enter here. There was no > instruction to enter Certification ID on v1.4 kit.Is there any new step is > required.? A CertID of "0" will bypass this prompt. This is a bug, and is being tracked ing Bug #813405.
Thanks. I executed the test by providing "0" as Cert ID. Info and Core tests failed for me. FWIW these tests passed with v1.4 kit. Probably you have another bug here. -Akash
Hi Akash, The info is expected to fail with the patch applied. The self checks will fail since the test has been modified. If you check the logs the only expected fail is the self check, others would be something else. Core should not be related to this bug or the patch. If you can check the core logs and decide if it looks like a bug. If so it's worth opening a new bug for that. -Rob
Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team. New Contents: no tech note needed.
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-2012-0711.html