John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 12:12:12PM -0400, Dave Miner wrote:
> 
>> The change I had suggested was to use the standard paths and names, 
>> rather than ones which were specific to the live CD (especially as they 
>> were initially architecture-specific).  That didn't get translated 
>> correctly in the prior iteration.
> 
> I see - that makes sense now, thanks.
> 

Sorry that I seem to be having trouble being lucid ;-)

>>> We'll work to get this change out to Linux, EC2 and any other
>>> stakeholders as soon as we can. I'll repurpose 6826097 to this effect.
>>> We have:
>>>
>>> /boot/x86.microroot (2009.06 and earlier live CD)
>>> /platform/i86pc/boot_archive (later live CD releases)
>>> /boot/boot_archive (pre-release 2009.06 bits)
>>>
>>> What will the AI release do? Can we drop the third check, or will it
>>> stay at /boot/boot_archive?
>>>
>> If it would be helpful in reducing the clutter, it looks like it would 
>> be easy to revert it to /boot/x86.microroot for now.  We can just 
>> pretend a few builds didn't exist ;-)
> 
> Just so we're clear, virt-install will look for
> /platform/i86pc/boot_archive, then /boot/x86.microroot, and then give
> up. This will cover both AI and live CDs that have been released, and
> break a few pre-111 iterations.
> 
> You (or someone) will take care of placing the boot archive in
> x86.microroot for both live and AI in 2009.06. The next release will
> modify both to use /platform/i86pc/boot_archive
> 
> Is that accurate? I should be able to get a 111-based virt-install
> change done today that does the above. When AI support comes in for
> virt-install we'll make sure it works similarly.
> 

Yup, accurate.  It'll be me, and the next release would be the target 
to move both.

>>>> 4. Install QE and xVM QE devise a plan for regular regression testing of 
>>>> PV OpenSolaris live CD installs
>>> I'm not sure who's owning this. I'll make sure it's covered again.
>> Wasn't meaning to dump that on you necessarily, but if you're game for 
>> following up, that's fine.
> 
> I'm following up.
> 

Thanks!

Dave


Reply via email to