Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/5] raisin: Change update/release parsing OSes

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 16/10/15 14:49, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, George Dunlap wrote:
>> At the moment, something like 7.1.1503 will be parsed as RELEASE=7.1
>> UPDATE=1503.  Change the bash string so that RELEASE=7 UPDATE=1.1503
>> in this case.
>>
>> Also add an example CentOS 7 release string, and add the RELEASE /
>> UPDATE parsing to lsb_release as well.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  lib/common-functions.sh | 8 +++++---
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/common-functions.sh b/lib/common-functions.sh
>> index a389054..1343dc8 100644
>> --- a/lib/common-functions.sh
>> +++ b/lib/common-functions.sh
>> @@ -103,13 +103,15 @@ function get_distro() {
>>          os_VENDOR=`lsb_release -i -s`
>>          os_RELEASE=`lsb_release -r -s`
>>          os_CODENAME=`lsb_release -c -s`
>> -        os_UPDATE=""
>> +        os_UPDATE=${os_RELEASE#*.}
>> +        os_RELEASE=${os_RELEASE%%.*}
>>      elif [[ -r /etc/redhat-release ]]
>>      then
>>          # Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Tikanga)
>>          # Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.0 Beta (Maipo)
>>          # CentOS release 5.5 (Final)
>>          # CentOS Linux release 6.0 (Final)
>> +        # CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core)
>>          # Fedora release 16 (Verne)
>>          # XenServer release 6.2.0-70446c (xenenterprise)
>>          os_CODENAME=""
>> @@ -120,8 +122,8 @@ function get_distro() {
>>                  ver=`sed -e 's/^.* \([0-9].*\) (\(.*\)).*$/\1\|\2/' 
>> /etc/redhat-release`
>>                  os_CODENAME=${ver#*|}
>>                  os_RELEASE=${ver%|*}
>> -                os_UPDATE=${os_RELEASE##*.}
>> -                os_RELEASE=${os_RELEASE%.*}
>> +                os_UPDATE=${os_RELEASE#*.}
>> +                os_RELEASE=${os_RELEASE%%.*}
>>                  break
> 
> This change is OK, but I don't know if this is what we want for the
> other case above. I would be tempted to leave the lsb_release case as
> is.

?

Don't we want the resulting state of "get_distro()" to work the same
whether you have lsb_release installed or not?

I wrote this patch quite a while ago, but I'm pretty sure that I tested
it with the lsb package installed and not installed for C7 (and maybe C6
as well) and with this patch I got the same results.

(Or to put it a different way: The only reason I even modified the
lsb_release section is because I installed the lsb package and got
strange results.)

 -George


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel