search for: collect_coreos_inspection_info

On 02/06/15 17:10, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Hello, > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24:58PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: >> + if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g)) { >> + guestfs_int_free_inspect_info (g); >> + return NULL; >> + } > Although this is stylistic, I think it's easier to understand if > you change the if condition to: > > if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g) == -1) { > ... > Since we '...

...TRO_LINUX_MINT: diff --git a/src/inspect.c b/src/inspect.c index f528bf2..dd6a06f 100644 --- a/src/inspect.c +++ b/src/inspect.c @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ COMPILE_REGEXP (re_primary_partition, "^/dev/(?:h|s|v)d.[1234]$", 0) static void check_for_duplicated_bsd_root (guestfs_h *g); +static int collect_coreos_inspection_info (guestfs_h *g); /* The main inspection code. */ char ** @@ -70,6 +71,15 @@ guestfs_impl_inspect_os (guestfs_h *g) } } + /* The OS inspection information for CoreOS are gathered by inspecting + * multiple filesystems. Gather all the inspected information in the + * inspect_fs stru...

On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 06:18:38PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: > On 02/06/15 17:10, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Hello, > > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24:58PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: > >> + if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g)) { > >> + guestfs_int_free_inspect_info (g); > >> + return NULL; > >> + } > > Although this is stylistic, I think it's easier to understand if > > you change the if condition to: > > > > if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g) == -1...

...g. On 02/06/15 18:30, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 06:18:38PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: >> On 02/06/15 17:10, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Hello, >> >>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24:58PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: >>>> + if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g)) { >>>> + guestfs_int_free_inspect_info (g); >>>> + return NULL; >>>> + } >>> Although this is stylistic, I think it's easier to understand if >>> you change the if condition to: >>> >>> if (collect_coreos_insp...

...hare && diff --git a/src/inspect.c b/src/inspect.c index 9055226..5e904d2 100644 --- a/src/inspect.c +++ b/src/inspect.c @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ COMPILE_REGEXP (re_primary_partition, "^/dev/(?:h|s|v)d.[1234]$", 0) static void check_for_duplicated_bsd_root (guestfs_h *g); static void collect_coreos_inspection_info (guestfs_h *g); +static void collect_linux_inspection_info (guestfs_h *g); +static void collect_linux_inspection_info_for (guestfs_h *g, struct inspect_fs *root); /** * The main inspection API. @@ -88,6 +90,12 @@ guestfs_impl_inspect_os (guestfs_h *g) */ check_for_duplicated_bsd_root (g...

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24:58PM +0300, Nikos Skalkotos wrote: > + if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g)) { > + guestfs_int_free_inspect_info (g); > + return NULL; > + } Although this is stylistic, I think it's easier to understand if you change the if condition to: if (collect_coreos_inspection_info (g) == -1) { ... Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red...

Hi, this patch series improves the way /usr filesystems are handled: tag them appropriately, so later on we can find them and merge results they contain directly back for the root filesystem. Changes in v2: - removed patches #1 and #2, already pushed - drop patch #3, no more needed - replace patch #4 with a better suggestion from Rich - change if into assert in patch #5 Thanks, Pino Toscano

Hi, this patch series improves the way /usr filesystems are handled: tag them appropriately, so later on we can find them and merge results they contain directly back for the root filesystem. The series includes also a new private debug API, and its usage to fix the resolution of /dev/mapper/.. devices found in fstab; without it, LVM /usr filesystems are not recognized as belonging to their

...RO_LINUX_MINT: diff --git a/src/inspect.c b/src/inspect.c index f528bf2..abe9087 100644 --- a/src/inspect.c +++ b/src/inspect.c @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ COMPILE_REGEXP (re_primary_partition, "^/dev/(?:h|s|v)d.[1234]$", 0) static void check_for_duplicated_bsd_root (guestfs_h *g); +static void collect_coreos_inspection_info (guestfs_h *g); /* The main inspection code. */ char ** @@ -70,6 +71,12 @@ guestfs_impl_inspect_os (guestfs_h *g) } } + /* The OS inspection information for CoreOS are gathered by inspecting + * multiple filesystems. Gather all the inspected information in the + * inspect_fs stru...

...n fs -> eprintf "%s" (string_of_fs fs)) fses; + flush stderr + ); + + (* The OS inspection information for CoreOS are gathered by inspecting + * multiple filesystems. Gather all the inspected information in the + * inspect_fs struct of the root filesystem. + *) + let fses = collect_coreos_inspection_info fses in + + (* Check if the same filesystem was listed twice as root in fses. + * This may happen for the *BSD root partition where an MBR partition + * is a shadow of the real root partition probably /dev/sda5 + *) + let fses = check_for_duplicated_bsd_root fses in + + (* For Linux guests...

...n fs -> eprintf "%s" (string_of_fs fs)) fses; + flush stderr + ); + + (* The OS inspection information for CoreOS are gathered by inspecting + * multiple filesystems. Gather all the inspected information in the + * inspect_fs struct of the root filesystem. + *) + let fses = collect_coreos_inspection_info fses in + + (* Check if the same filesystem was listed twice as root in fses. + * This may happen for the *BSD root partition where an MBR partition + * is a shadow of the real root partition probably /dev/sda5 + *) + let fses = check_for_duplicated_bsd_root fses in + + (* For Linux guests...

This is the (incomplete) patch which reimplements inspection APIs in the daemon. All ‘XXX’s in this patch indicate areas which are not yet implemented or need further work. Rich.

...(fs->version.v_major == 6 && fs->version.v_minor == 2) return icon_windows_8 (g, fs, size_r); /* Not (yet) a supported version of Windows. */ diff --git a/src/inspect.c b/src/inspect.c index 4d8138a..bd32d8f 100644 --- a/src/inspect.c +++ b/src/inspect.c @@ -136,10 +136,7 @@ collect_coreos_inspection_info (guestfs_h *g) * the boot loader. As a workaround, we check the OS versions and pick the * one with the higher version as active. */ - if (usr && - (usr->major_version > fs->major_version || - (usr->major_version == fs->major_version &&...

Hi, this adds an helper version struct, and uses it in the backends (for the libvirt and qemu versions) and inspection code. This also moves common code to that, so it is not repeated in many places. This should help with the small refactoring proposed with https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2016-May/msg00070.html Thanks, Pino Toscano (2): src: start unifying version handling

Hi, this adds an helper version struct, and uses it in the backends (for the libvirt and qemu versions) and inspection code. This also moves common code to that, so it is not repeated in many places. This should help with the small refactoring proposed with https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2016-May/msg00070.html Thanks, Pino Toscano (2): src: start unifying version handling

v9 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00139.html This depends on these three series (the first two being single minor patches): https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00207.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00209.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00215.html There is no substantive change. I

This depends on the patch series "[PATCH 00/27] Reimplement many daemon APIs in OCaml." (https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00098.html) v8 was posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00274.html v9: - I split up the mega-patch into a more reviewable series of smaller, incremental patches. There are some other changes vs v8, but

This fixes almost everything. Note that it adds an extra commit which fixes the whole utf8/iconv business. It's probably better to list what isn't fixed: (1) I didn't leave the osinfo code around because I'm still haven't looked too closely at virt-builder-repository. Can't we just fetch this code from the git history when we need it? (2) I didn't change the way

v10: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00245.html No actual change here, but I rebased and retested. Also this series now does not depend on any other patch series since everything else needed is upstream. Rich.

v6 was posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00103.html and this requires the utilities refactoring posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00169.html Inspection is now complete[*], although not very well tested. I'm intending to compare the output of many guests using old & new virt-inspector to see if I can find any