[Fedora QA] #173: Obsoleting the tests for verifying http/nfs/ftp/hard disk install sources

Fedora QA trac at fedorahosted.org
Fri Feb 25 06:39:15 UTC 2011

#173: Obsoleting the tests for verifying http/nfs/ftp/hard disk install sources
  Reporter:  rhe          |       Owner:  rhe      
      Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  new      
  Priority:  major        |   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki         |     Version:           
Resolution:               |    Keywords:           
Comment (by rhe):

 Replying to [comment:1 jlaska]:
 > Thanks for raising this topic!  We'll need to confirm with clumens of
 course, but I don't know if there are plans to add graphical repository
 configuration for NFS ISO, HD and HD ISO installation methods.  I don't
 believe there are plans to remove loader handling for package repository
 access methods.  Which means, Fedora will still support traditional
 installation methods available by way of ''askmethod''.
 Ok, if it's still supported, there should be tests covering it.

 > Perhaps we need to rename/rethink these different tests?

 Yeah, and your grouping idea reminds me a way to do it: Combine current
 [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Installation_Source Install
 source](except install source on Media tests) and
 [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Repository Package repository]
 together, naming it as 'Installation repository'. In this category, cases
 are sub-categoried by http, NFS, NFSISO and CD/DVD. How does this sound?

 > The two functions that need verification are ...
 >  1. the loader handling/setup of a given installation repository.  I'm
 thinking these are the operations that dictate how the 'Installation repo'
 is setup.  For some boot methods, this is handled for us (e.g. DVD creates
 a CDROM repo, boot.iso and pxeboot don't add any 'installation repo')
 >  2. the graphical repository dialog allowing for additional repos, repo
 removal, and existing repo edits.  These are mostly manual (except for
 kickstart) functions.
 > As for loader handling/setup of a given installation repository, we have
 the following scenarios (most of which are already tests, but perhaps need
 > 1. Installation repository - http
 >  * default scenario
 >   1. Boot and install using a netinst.iso or pxeboot images

 Current test is:
 InstallSourceBootIso] (using default retrieved mirror repo)

 >  * variation(s):
 >   1. Boot with: 'askmethod' and manually input HTTP repo
 Current test is:
 InstallSourceHttp], need rename it and modify the content about 'install
 source' part.
 >   2. Boot with: repo=http://server/path/to/repo
 Current test is:
 >   3. Use ftp://server/path/to/repo
 >   4. Use ftp://user:pass@server/path/to/repo

 If we include FTP tests in HTTP tests, these two can be included in the
 above two http cases as a choice to test?

 >   5. Configure proxy=[protocol://][username[:password]@]host[:port]
 No test case yet. I think this can be included as an optional step in the
 http repo tests?

 > 2. Installation repository - NFS
 >  * default scenario
 >   1. Use graphical repository dialog to input NFS Server and PATH

 Current test is:

 >  * variation(s):
 >   1. Boot with: repo=nfs:<server>:/<path>
 Current test is:

 and 2. Boot with 'askmethod'?
 InstallSourceNfs] is the test to be adjusted.

 > 3. Installation repository - NFS ISO
 >  * default scenario
 >   1. Boot with 'askmethod' and manually enter NFS ISO server + path
 Current test to be adjusted:

 >  * variation(s):
 >   1. Boot with: repo=nfsiso[:options]:<server>:/<path>
 No test case covering it yet. Need to create it.

 > 4. Install repository - HD ISO
 >  * default scenario
 >   1. Boot with 'askmethod' and manually enter HD device and path

 >  * variations:
 >   1. repo=hd:<device>:/<path>
 >   2. repo=hd:LABEL=<label>:/<path>
 >   3. repo=hd:UUID=<uuid>:/<path>

 No test case yet. The above three can be combined into one test in my

 > 5. Install repository - CD/DVD ISO
 >  * default scenario
 >   1. Boot and install from a CD or DVD ISO image
 Current test is
 >  * variations:
 >   1. Boot with 'askmethod' and selects CD-ROM/DVD-ROM
 >   2. Boot with repo=cdrom:<device>

 No test case yet. Do we need cover these two? I don't think they are
 common use cases.
 > If we include the FTP* tests you list as a variation of the HTTP test,
 we can remove them altogether.

 Can you clarify this? do you mean ftp can be a option in http test cases?
 > As for graphical repository edits, we have those covered already right?
 Yes. They may need to rename then.

Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/173#comment:2>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance

More information about the test mailing list