Where does this repo come from? It wasn't defined?

[Zack Perry]

Hi,

I just setup cobbler 2.2.2 on two KVM guests (SL 6.2 64bit) to test it out.  So far so
good, but I have observed a repo related behavior that is puzzling to me. The following
should show the gist of the issue:

[root@sl0 ~]# cobbler repo list
   zepel-6-x86_64
   zsl6-x86_64

So, I have only two test repos defined.

In the kickstart template, I have:


    44  #
    45  $yum_repo_stanza
    46  
    47  #

The leading numbers are line numbers - I use the stanza to express the two aforementioned
repos.

Now lets take a look of the rendered kickstart answer file:

[root@sl0 kickstarts]# cobbler system getks --name=sl1 |less
[...]
repo --name=zsl6-x86_64 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cblr/links/sl6-x86_64
repo --name=zepel-6-x86_64
--baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/repo_mirror/zepel-6-x86_64
repo --name=source-1 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/ks_mirror/sl6-x86_64
[...]

So, the $yum_repo_stanza expanded into three kickstart repo statements!
Where did the repo --name=source-1 came from?

I doubled checked the file system too. Only two subdirectories:

[root@sl0 repo_mirror]# pwd
/var/www/cobbler/repo_mirror
[root@sl0 repo_mirror]# ls -l
total 8
drwxr-xr-x 5 root apache 4096 Jun  4 12:16 zepel-6-x86_64
drwxr-xr-x 2 root apache 4096 May 14 14:13 zsl6-x86_64

I would appreciate any hints why cobbler behaves so, and how I can "get around"
or "fix" this issue.

Regards,

Zack

[Greg Swift]

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Zack Perry <zack.perry(a)sbcglobal.net&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  I just setup cobbler 2.2.2 on two KVM guests (SL 6.2 64bit) to test it out.  So far so
> good, but I have observed a repo related behavior that is puzzling to me. The following
> should show the gist of the issue:
>
>  [root@sl0 ~]# cobbler repo list
>    zepel-6-x86_64
>    zsl6-x86_64
>
>  So, I have only two test repos defined.
>
>  In the kickstart template, I have:
>
>
>     44  #
>     45  $yum_repo_stanza
>     46
>     47  #
>
>  The leading numbers are line numbers - I use the stanza to express the two aforementioned
> repos.
>
>  Now lets take a look of the rendered kickstart answer file:
>
>  [root@sl0 kickstarts]# cobbler system getks --name=sl1 |less
>  [...]
>  repo --name=zsl6-x86_64 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cblr/links/sl6-x86_64
>  repo --name=zepel-6-x86_64
> --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/repo_mirror/zepel-6-x86_64
>  repo --name=source-1 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/ks_mirror/sl6-x86_64
>  [...]
>
>  So, the $yum_repo_stanza expanded into three kickstart repo statements!
>  Where did the repo --name=source-1 came from?
>
>  I doubled checked the file system too. Only two subdirectories:
>
>  [root@sl0 repo_mirror]# pwd
>  /var/www/cobbler/repo_mirror
>  [root@sl0 repo_mirror]# ls -l
>  total 8
>  drwxr-xr-x 5 root apache 4096 Jun  4 12:16 zepel-6-x86_64
>  drwxr-xr-x 2 root apache 4096 May 14 14:13 zsl6-x86_64
>
>  I would appreciate any hints why cobbler behaves so, and how I can "get around"
> or "fix" this issue.
>
>  Regards,
>
>  Zack 
the one with the name 'source1' is the distribution's repository.
these aren't listed when you do a 'cobbler repo list'.  Its intended
behavior.  Based on reviewing the above I assume zsl6-x86_64 is the
same thing?  Do you need to have a separate copy of this repository,
or would could you juse use the one created by the creation of the
distribution?

-greg

[Zack Perry]

Hi Greg,

Thanks for your speedy reply.


>  > [root@sl0 kickstarts]# cobbler system getks --name=sl1
>  |less
>  > [...]
>  > repo --name=zsl6-x86_64 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cblr/links/sl6-x86_64
>  > repo --name=zepel-6-x86_64
> --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/repo_mirror/zepel-6-x86_64
>  > repo --name=source-1 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/ks_mirror/sl6-x86_64
>  > [...]
>  >
>  > So, the $yum_repo_stanza expanded into three kickstart
>  repo statements!
>  > Where did the repo --name=source-1 came from?
>  > 
>  the one with the name 'source1' is the distribution's
> repository.
>  these aren't listed when you do a 'cobbler repo list'. Its intended
>  behavior.   
Ah. Wasn't aware of this. Maybe this should be part of the documentation? 

>  Based on reviewing the above I assume zsl6-x86_64 is the
>  same thing?   
You are correct. Also, I recalled now, I tried the 'import' once, and then I
renamed the repo. Could that be the reason why I see such "duplicates"?

>  Do you need to have a separate copy of this repository,
>  or would could you juse use the one created by the creation
>  of the distribution? 
Actually, I know that having the source-1 doesn't have any negative impact. It just
looked not clean and I was trying to find a way to make the set up more tidy.

Regards,

Zack

[Greg Swift]

> > > [root@sl0 kickstarts]# cobbler system getks --name=sl1
> > |less
> > > [...]
> > > repo --name=zsl6-x86_64 --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cblr/links/sl6-x86_64
> > > repo --name=zepel-6-x86_64
> --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/repo_mirror/zepel-6-x86_64
> > > repo --name=source-1
> --baseurl=http://192.168.123.3/cobbler/ks_mirror/sl6-x86_64
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > So, the $yum_repo_stanza expanded into three kickstart
> > repo statements!
> > > Where did the repo --name=source-1 came from?
> > >
>
> > the one with the name 'source1' is the distribution's repository.
> > these aren't listed when you do a 'cobbler repo list'. Its intended
> > behavior.
>
>  Ah. Wasn't aware of this. Maybe this should be part of the documentation? 
help with documentation is definitely welcome :)

> > Based on reviewing the above I assume zsl6-x86_64 is the
> > same thing?
>
>  You are correct. Also, I recalled now, I tried the 'import' once, and then I
> renamed the repo. Could that be the reason why I see such "duplicates"? 
So
ya.. importing is what would have done it.  I'm not sure that
distro add would touch this.  I've never actually used 'distro add'.
I'd say that is why you see the duplicates.  You must be using a
distro+profile pairing for this.

> > Do you need to have a separate copy of this repository,
> > or would could you juse use the one created by the creation
> > of the distribution?
>
>  Actually, I know that having the source-1 doesn't have any negative impact. It just
> looked not clean and I was trying to find a way to make the set up more tidy. 
kewl

[Zack Perry]

Hi Greg,

Again, thanks for your quick response.

>  >
>  > Ah. Wasn't aware of this. Maybe this should be part of
>  the documentation?
>  
>  help with documentation is definitely welcome :)
>   
Would be delighted to.  What is the "officially" sanctioned way to "chip
in" in this regard?

Regards,

Zack

[Greg Swift]

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Zack Perry <zack.perry(a)sbcglobal.net&gt; wrote:
>  Hi Greg,
>
>  Again, thanks for your quick response.
>
> > >
> > > Ah. Wasn't aware of this. Maybe this should be part of
> > the documentation?
> >
> > help with documentation is definitely welcome :)
> >
>
>  Would be delighted to.  What is the "officially" sanctioned way to "chip
> in" in this regard? 
I'm not sure if specifial (my new work for specific or special.. was a
typo but i'm gonna run with it) access is required, but the
documentation on github is a wiki.  That also means you can check out
the wiki and submit patches like you normally would for cobbler.  I'm
not sure which is the better or standard route, james or someone could
speak to that, but those are the two options.

-greg