Michael DeHaan wrote: > Partha Aji wrote: > >> Hey Michael, >> I basically fixed most of the Fix Me, removed some unused stuff... Fixed >> the cobbler.spec to generate the correct rpms.. Updated the templates to >> new stuff. I have questions on 3 fix mes that I have to implement >> >> # FIXME: missing code to ensure TFTP is enabled >> # FIXME: missing code to configure firewall (???) >> # FIXME: missing code to ensure cobblerd, httpd, xinetd is >> chkconfig on >> >> I was wondering if I could simply use the cobbler check logic found in >> cobbler.cobbler.action_check to do the validation for TFTP enabled and >> configuring firewall. Secondly are we sure about wanting chkconfig on >> for those services right (I thought sysadmins were wary of those >> things).. >> I was also confused on when to do Subprocess.call( shell=True) vs (shell >> = False). I currently use Shell = False unless the thing barfed saying >> can;t execute the child process in which case I 'd go for shell = True >> . I had to do shell = True for for '/sbin/service cobblerd restart', >> and "/sbin/service httpd restart" .. I added the logic to check return >> codes and cease execution if it failed.. Please review the attached >> patches when you have time and apply them accordingly.. I'll meanwhile >> work on doing the TFTP enablement checks... >> >> PS: >> I was wondering if you were ok with autogenerating the modules.conf & >> settings files when they install the cobbler RPM. >> For example we can have a post script that runs >> '/usr/bin/cobbler-setup -a >> /usr/share/cobbler/installer_templates/defaults' >> This will make the templates the defacto place to add all the new config >> entries... You can add the default values to installer_templates/defaults >> That way we don't need keep installer_templates/modules.conf.template in >> sync with config/modules.conf... Please let me know what you think of >> the idea... Thanks for the reviews in the last commit.. >> >> Partha >> >> > > Partha, > > I am a bit confused by the first patch as I've already committed the > changes to remove the dict() based code and so forth. As a result, > these patches do not apply. I am guessing they were made against the > copy in the Spacewalk tree, not the copy in the Cobbler tree which > already had my fixes applied? > > --Michael > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cobbler mailing list > [email protected] > https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler >
All so far apply accept Patch 2, which was already committed. Testing now... _______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
