Fixing livecd ISO labels (bz 1145264)

[Dennis Gilmore]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 19:09:25 -0600
Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:31:42 -0500
> Cole Robinson <crobinso at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Fixing buildsys CC
> > 
> > On 11/15/2014 01:29 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > The ISO volume ID for the Fedora 21 workstation livecd is
> > > 'Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-2', which doesn't actually say 21
> > > in it, and libosinfo can't use it to detect the fedora version for
> > > boxes/virt-manager.
> > >
> > > Koji is responsible for generating the volume ID, and there's a
> > > bug filed:
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145264
> > >
> > > I also sent a (untested) koji patch to buildsys list:
> > >
> > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/buildsys/2014-October/004411.html
> 
> NAK on this patch its the completely wrong place to apply such a
> thing. the fix belongs in livecd-tools

of course though things need to be done differently in koji. because we
would need to pass through the full untrunckated value or do something
else that involves ignoring the CLI. But I do stand by koji being the
wrong place for that knowledge. especially true if we change the naming
scheme going forward. which is something we intend to do. keep them
under 32 characters but make them a bit more readable. really libosinfo
should be looking in the image and not relying on the filesystem
volumeid to determine the release of an image. something outside of the
contents could be manipulated, while it is much less likely to happen
inside the image.

Denni

> > > However neither have received a response, so I'm reaching out
> > > here.
> > >
> > > If this isn't fixed before F21 GA, we are stuck with the crappy
> > > volume ID forever and tools that are depending on it are in a
> > > tough spot. Is there any process to escalate this and get the fix
> > > deployed to infrastructure? (FWIW I've just proposed the bug as a
> > > freeze exception, but presumably it will take more coordination
> > > that that)
> 
> Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=4ACh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----