[PATCH] make use of the proxy field in buildiso

[Jörgen Maas]

Hi,

This patch enables buildiso to use the proxy field which was recently
added to profiles & systems. For now it's only implemented for SuSE,
Debian and Ubuntu breeds, i will look into the RedHat case next week
or so.

Patch attached and also in my buildiso branch:
https://github.com/jmaas/Cobbler/commit/bedf25763d607e35c330240c9bc64470b...

-- 
Grtz,
Jörgen Maas

[James Cammarata]

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Jörgen Maas <jorgen.maas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  This patch enables buildiso to use the proxy field which was recently
>  added to profiles & systems. For now it's only implemented for SuSE,
>  Debian and Ubuntu breeds, i will look into the RedHat case next week
>  or so.
>
>  Patch attached and also in my buildiso branch:
>  https://github.com/jmaas/Cobbler/commit/bedf25763d607e35c330240c9bc64470b... 
Applied, thanks!

[Jörgen Maas]

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:59 AM, James Cammarata <jimi(a)sngx.net&gt; wrote:
>  Applied, thanks! 
Wow thats fast :). Thanks!

James, i'm working on getting some SuSE snippets commited, but i have
a question about the new interface_type stuff you've introduced.
What's the plan regarding the old fields (bonding_master) etc? Will
those be removed in the next release? Or should i still account for
those old or once-to-be-removed fields in my snippets?

-- 
Grtz,
Jörgen Maas

[James Cammarata]

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 3:08 AM, Jörgen Maas <jorgen.maas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:59 AM, James Cammarata <jimi(a)sngx.net&gt;
> wrote:
> >
> > Applied, thanks!
>
>  Wow thats fast :). Thanks!
>
>  James, i'm working on getting some SuSE snippets commited, but i have
>  a question about the new interface_type stuff you've introduced.
>  What's the plan regarding the old fields (bonding_master) etc? Will
>  those be removed in the next release? Or should i still account for
>  those old or once-to-be-removed fields in my snippets? 
They are deprecated and may be removed in the future, and currently
they map to the new fields so that if you use them it stores the data
in the new format. Also, if you load an old object and save it, the
data will be migrated to the new fields.

So, you can use the old fields, but it would be best if you used the new ones.

[Jörgen Maas]

James,

While working on some snippets i found this:

item_system:
    def set_interface_type(self,type,interface):
        <snip>
        if type == "na":
            type = "" <-- why?

but interface_type "" is not defined in the FIELDS dict:
["*interface_type","na",0,"Interface
Type",True,"",["na","master","slave","bond","bond_slave","bridge","bridge_slave"],"str"],

Whats the reason for this?

Thanks!

-- 
Grtz,
Jörgen Maas

[James Cammarata]

On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Jörgen Maas <jorgen.maas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  James,
>
>  While working on some snippets i found this:
>
>  item_system:
>     def set_interface_type(self,type,interface):
>         <snip>
>         if type == "na":
>             type = "" <-- why?
>
>  but interface_type "" is not defined in the FIELDS dict:
>  ["*interface_type","na",0,"Interface
>
> Type",True,"",["na","master","slave","bond","bond_slave","bridge","bridge_slave"],"str"],
>
>  Whats the reason for this? 
"NA" means that it's just a standard interface, but we don't actually
pass that down to snippets, we just give them an empty string. I
suppose we could have put "normal" there or something, but that's the
way it's been since we've had the bonded interface fields.

[Jörgen Maas]

On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM, James Cammarata <jimi(a)sngx.net&gt; wrote:
>  "NA" means that it's just a standard interface, but we
> don't actually
>  pass that down to snippets, we just give them an empty string. I
>  suppose we could have put "normal" there or something, but that's the
>  way it's been since we've had the bonded interface fields. 
Ok, thanks
-- 
Grtz,
Jörgen Maas