[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: kickstart network command proposal




I know that the existing behaviour throws a *lot* of people for a loop, it pops up on IRC and email lists occasionally, because, as you say, it's non-standard behaviour. 

In fact, I recently had to work around this behaviour by patching kickstart.py. 

Here' s my patch on 11.1.2.87,  I know there's a newer version, I'm just pulling down changes on the anaconda master branch now, I'll see if I can come up with a patch against the master.

--- anaconda-11.1.2.87.orig/kickstart.py        2009-03-24 15:26:04.000000000 -0400
+++ anaconda-11.1.2.87/kickstart.py     2009-03-24 15:55:15.000000000 -0400
@@ -898,7 +898,8 @@
         dispatch.skipStep("betanag")
         dispatch.skipStep("installtype")
         dispatch.skipStep("tasksel")
-        dispatch.skipStep("network")
+       if self.ksdata.network:
+               dispatch.skipStep("network")

         # Don't show confirmation screens on non-interactive installs.
         if not self.ksdata.interactive:



Chris Lumens wrote:
One basic assumption we have today is that a kickstart file without a
network line implies DHCP.  In all other cases, a kickstart file without
some piece of information implies stop and ask.  How many people will
complain if I change the network line to behave like all others for F12
and RHEL6?

This gets rid of the need to port network --bootproto=query from RHEL5
to Rawhide since it would then be the default behavior.

- Chris

_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
  

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]