Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 861418
the 'Image UUID' label used in the image details page seams meaningless while the real image ID is missing
Last modified: 2013-05-01 17:17:43 EDT
the 'Image UUID' label used in the image details page seams meaningless, the real image ID isn't displayed instead. the image ID should be unique across builds and target providers; that is also the value needed by audrey in the depolyable files, but is missing from the page as a reference, from the commandline tool one can list the following: aeolus-image list --images aeolus-image list --images --environment $envenvironment aeolus-image list --builds $image_id aeolus-image list --targetimages $build_id aeolus-image list --providerimages $target_id
The "Image UUID" us actually our UUID for the Provider image. Note that is different to the "Cloud Resource Provider's Image ID ". The latter is the ID number assigned by the provider to the copy of the image which has been pushed. e.g. the Amazon AMI ID. I suggest that we remove the "Image UUID", since it is no easy to describe its purpose, it is available from the CLI, and, in the absence of the ability to delete the images, there's not a great deal that can be done with it. Once it is removed, we can add a new field, Labelled "Image ID", in the "Properties" field, which currently contains "Cloud: <cloud name>" That field should display the Image Id, which is currently only available in the URL for the page, and which is the ID which is most likely to be used in application blueprints etc,,
Patch created: http://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/aeolus-devel/2012-October/012831.html
Updated patch: http://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/aeolus-devel/2012-October/012834.html
Pushed to master/1.1: commit e7f468765bac0dbdc4c398e6cc6e50f338c21473 Author: Tzu-Mainn Chen <tzumainn@redhat.com> Date: Wed Oct 3 15:11:27 2012 -0400 BZ861418 display useful image uuid information on details page Signed-off-by: Matt Wagner <matt.wagner@redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit 0eac62b3748e537c6d99241e23441b179083aaa7)
works for me
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/RHEA-2012-1516.html