Re: Would be possible to have a ".treeinfo" file added to the installers' page?
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:20:09 +0100
- From: Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Would be possible to have a ".treeinfo" file added to the installers' page?
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 3:02 PM Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Firstly, sorry for the late reply. This e-mail got lost in my inbox, my bad! :-(
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:09 PM Bastian Blank <waldi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 10:45:31AM +0100, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
> > > Although the subject says it all, let me explain the background of the
> > > change so you all can get the idea of why it'd help a few projects
> > > and/or even come up with a better solution than adding a ".treeinfo"
> > > file.
> > I'm not exactly sure what you expect from this. Maybe it would be
> > easier if you provide a complete example, including information for at
> > least one non-mainstream architecture.
> Does aarch64 counts as non-mainstream architecture?
> If so, here's one example:
> About "not exactly sure what you expect from this", virtualization
> management apps (like virt-manager) can perform a "network based"
> installation taking as parameters only the "location".
> The location, for the specific debian stable case is:
> and, from this location, there's some hardcoded assumptions in the
> code about where the kernel + initrd could be found and from there
> virt-manager knows what to do.
> We, as libosinfo, already have the information about the "location"
> and where the kernel/initrd are stored, this is cool and works as
> expected. However, one thing that we try to do is given a URL, we try
> to guess the OS from the URL and return the proper OS (and its
> version) to apps like virt-manager, so virt-manager can do things like
> perform an express installation (preseed installation) ...
> With the current situation, there's nothing we (as libosinfo) could
> look at and try to figure out which version of Debian we're dealing
> with (and, then, provide the info about resources to be used and what
> not), thus the suggestion to have, under https://.../installer-amd64/
> the ".treeinfo" file that could help us to properly detect which
> system we're dealing with and, mainly, provide the correct information
> for apps like virt-manager.
> Is this more clear? I mean, the expectations and the whole reasoning
> behind my e-mails?
> > > : http://download.opensuse.org/pub/opensuse/distribution/leap/15.0/repo/oss/.treeinfo
> > > : http://mirror.vutbr.cz/fedora/releases/29/Server/x86_64/os/.treeinfo
> > > : http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/os/x86_64/.treeinfo
> > How do you detect those special paths? Because you already need to know
> > them somehow.
> Those are part of osinfo-db. So, for every new debian release we'd add
> a new debian entry and in the entry you can see something like:
> So, from this we can already tell mgmt apps the debian-testing URL and
> from where they should get the kernel + initrd in order to boot.
> However, if a custom URL is passed to libosinfo there's no way we
> could detect it as a "debian-testing" URL as we do not know what we
> should look for to ensure that.
> Do you get what I'm trying to say? Basically, we can't start parsing
> URLs in order to try to detect OSes, we should do that based on
> something *under* the path passed (https://.../installer-amd64) that
> we could just try to parse and ensure "it's a debian9".
> The .treeinfo idea was suggested mainly because it's been already used
> in other places (as pointed out by the examples above), but I'd be
> more than happy to adapt libosinfo code to check for something else as
> long as we know what to check for.
> > Bastian
> > --
> > Hailing frequencies open, Captain.
> Best Regards,
> Fabiano Fidêncio