libvirt users - Jan 2022 - Best way to install guest when it is not listed in output of osinfo-query os

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander
wrote:
> Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the
> other distros?
I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably just
a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)

In addition to that, considering that there already entries for
Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable
might make sense too.

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization

On 12/21/2021 10:41 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the
>> other distros?
>
> I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably
just
> a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)
>
> In addition to that, considering that there already entries for
> Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable
> might make sense too.
>
That would be lovely if 'debian-unknown' and 'debian11' could be
available on Bullseye!!! :)

Is it intentional that the Debian URLs in the output of 'osinfo-query
os' point to 'debian.org/debian/VERSION_ID' instead of
'debian.org/releases/VERSION_ID|VERSION_CODENAME'?

--
John Doe

On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 02:19:50PM +0100, john doe
wrote:
> On 12/21/2021 10:41 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> > > Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of
the
> > > other distros?
> > 
> > I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's
probably just
> > a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)
> > 
> > In addition to that, considering that there already entries for
> > Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable
> > might make sense too.
> > 
> 
> That would be lovely if 'debian-unknown' and 'debian11'
could be
> available on Bullseye!!! :)
> 
> Is it intentional that the Debian URLs in the output of 'osinfo-query
> os' point to 'debian.org/debian/VERSION_ID' instead of
> 'debian.org/releases/VERSION_ID|VERSION_CODENAME'?
The URLs are not a pointer to any specific resource. They are just an
arbitrarily invented unique identifier & once released, we must never
change any URL. By convention we pick a short "product name" as the
first path component, because over time vendors have introduced new
or parallel products. Thus '/releases/' would not be future proof.

As an example, Fedora has both the traditional 'fedora' OS releases
and 'silverblue'.


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|