On 01/23/2014 10:51 PM, Ales Zelinka wrote:
On 22.1.2014 23:20, Dan Callaghan wrote:
> Excerpts from Ales Zelinka's message of 2014-01-22 22:16:46 +1000:
>> nice feature! Can Beaker provide the user with an error message in
>> addition to the usual status & result?
>> IMO it would be much better to tell the user e.g. "abort/fail - anaconda
>> in interactive mode" instead of just "abort/fail". Especially
>> Beaker already has this information (even if only in the form of
>> testsuite test-case names).
> Yes, we do record the failure message in the recipe results. I would
> like to improve the way we show installation status/progress  but in
> the meantime, if Beaker detects installation failure it will be recorded
> as a Fail result against the first task (typically
> /distribution/install) with a message such as:
> Installation failed: + Error Parsing Kickstart Config +
> Some of the failure messages are unfortunately a bit more cryptic, like:
> Installation failed: Press enter to exit.
hmm, that might confuse users more than no error message. I'll probably
display just some generic "fatal error in anaconda log" message for all
the "Installation failed:.*" strings.
We'd like to include that detail still, but I agree the meaning of the
displayed text could be made clearer.
Perhaps something like "Install failed due to fatal error or user prompt
in Anaconda: .*"?
> If you're interested in seeing the myriad ways in which
> report a failure, I collected some samples  when I implemented the
> feature. So the heuristics for finding failures are a bit crude...
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=991245
>  http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/bz952661-anaconda-failures/
Hehe, yeah. I saw the patterns and example logs in the patch. That will
be fun to keep up to date.
Concerns regarding the resulting maintenance burden were part of the
reason it took so long for us to decide this was worth the benefits :)
On the other hand, if we're successful in building a closer relationship
with the upstream Anaconda devs, then we may be able to get to a point
where they let us know in advance when new ways to fail or prompt for
user input are added (or even start providing a consistent marker to
simplify automated monitoring). Perhaps we should file an upstream bug
Red Hat Hosted & Shared Services
Software Engineering & Development, Brisbane
Testing Solutions Team Lead
Beaker Development Lead (http://beaker-project.org/