From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Pang, LongtaoX" Subject: Re: [PATCH OSSTEST 11/12] Changes on test step of debain hvm guest install Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 09:02:22 +0000 Message-ID: <86C3224E41A7434B904EC364302132D80E45A023@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1423648341-203755-1-git-send-email-robert.hu@intel.com> <1423648341-203755-12-git-send-email-robert.hu@intel.com> <21724.60955.207370.14337@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <9E79D1C9A97CFD4097BCE431828FDD31B15D9E@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <21725.59370.336561.485823@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <9E79D1C9A97CFD4097BCE431828FDD31B18B38@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20150216101636.GA12471@zion.uk.xensource.com> <9E79D1C9A97CFD4097BCE431828FDD31B1AB22@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20150217103739.GA2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> <20150217104640.GB2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150217104640.GB2159@zion.uk.xensource.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Wei Liu Cc: "Hu, Robert" , "jfehlig@suse.com" , Ian Jackson , "ian.campbell@citrix.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Wei Liu [mailto:wei.liu2@citrix.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 6:47 PM > To: Hu, Robert > Cc: Wei Liu; Ian Jackson; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; jfehlig@suse.com; > ian.campbell@citrix.com; Pang, LongtaoX > Subject: Re: [PATCH OSSTEST 11/12] Changes on test step of debain hvm guest > install > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:37:39AM +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:45:34AM +0000, Hu, Robert wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > > > > Am I supposed to wait for Wei's patch or use my approach for a > > > > > while and revert to Wei's patch afterwards? > > > > > > > > What patch do you expect from me? > > > That Ian mentioned above > > > 'unify the d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe in Debian.pm with the one > > > in ts-debian-hvm-install, and make all Debian HVM installations use > > > LVM.' > > > > I'm afraid I don't have time to do the refactoring and testing any > > time soon. > > > > I had a look at d-i's preseed documentation. And this is what I come > > up with. Note it's untested patch, just a proof-of-concept what the > > final recipe might look like. > > > > A proper upstream patch will require factoring out the common bits > > first (/boot, / and swap) and then append test case specific bits (in > > this case, the EFI boot partition) later. > > > > Wei. > > > > diff --git a/ts-debian-hvm-install b/ts-debian-hvm-install index > > 449b96c..e87a2c0 100755 > > --- a/ts-debian-hvm-install > > +++ b/ts-debian-hvm-install > > @@ -54,6 +54,12 @@ d-i partman-auto/method string regular > > > > d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe string \\ > > boot-root :: \\ > > + 100 50 100 ext4 > > + \$primary{ } \$bootable{ } > \\ > > + method{ format } format{ } > \\ > > + use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 } > \\ > ext4 > > Copy and paste error, sorry. > > > + mountpoint{ /boot } > \\ > > + . > \\ > > 512 50 512 vfat \\ > > \$primary{ } \$bootable{ } \\ > ^^^^^^^^ And you might > want to get rid of this bootable flag. > > The testing of this patch will require you to run at least > test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-{debianhvm,ovmf}-amd64. > Since this is just a proof-of-concept patch, could you provide a workable one based on latest OSSTest master branch, and make all Debian HVM installations use LVM? > Wei.