Composefs test parity with ostree #1913
Conversation
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
from
4d359af to
1229ffa
Compare
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
8 times, most recently
from
dc68b62 to
8da9fce
Compare
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3799979 to
18bbf01
Compare
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
6 times, most recently
from
66fde4e to
c6bc807
Compare
|
Requires bootc-dev/infra#95 |
Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
This is the Non UKI version, i.e. version with Type1 bootloader entries Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
The tests assume an ostree system right now, but we want the same tests for composefs systems as well. Add a `is_composefs` function to differentitate between the two backends during testing Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
2 times, most recently
from
50dcc5f to
0106a4b
Compare
|
Requires bootc-dev/actions#11 |
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
from
0106a4b to
ff7c0e5
Compare
|
Hmmm, it's still picking up bcvk v0.9.0 |
Add tests for composefs backend for grub and sdboot. Update the testing matrix in CI Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
Johan-Liebert1
force-pushed
the
cfs-tests
branch
from
ff7c0e5 to
ec86999
Compare
Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
On systemd v258, bootctl doesn't copy the systemd-boot binaries to the ESP, so we copy the binaries ourselves if we don't find them in the final ESP Signed-off-by: Pragyan Poudyal <[email protected]>
| # No fedora-44 due to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2429501 | ||
| test_os: [fedora-43, centos-9, centos-10] | ||
| variant: [ostree, composefs-sealeduki-sdboot] | ||
| variant: [ostree, composefs-sealeduki-sdboot, composefs-sdboot, composefs-grub] |
| case "${{ matrix.variant }}" in | ||
| composefs-grub|composefs-sdboot) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer we do this kind of thing in Justfile so it's easier to do locally.
| if [ "${{ matrix.variant }}" = "composefs-sealeduki-sdboot" ]; then | ||
| just test-composefs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think at this point it'd be cleaner to have a mechainism to skip some tests (tmt already has metadata) so it's always just test-tmt integration and the variant detection does the right thing internally.
| .run_inherited_with_cmd_context()?; | ||
|
|
||
| // Check for systemd-boot binaries in the EFI/systemd directory | ||
| // systemd v258 won't copy the binary if an EFI booted system is not detected |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we really want bootctl --force-if-non-efi-booted or so...did you file a bug report about this? We should chase down the change and find the rationale.
The logic here feels too manual. (I mean if we had to I'd argue we just fake it out by creating /sys/firmware/efi as mount point or so - or wahtever is needed to make bootctl work)
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if args.composefs_backend { | ||
| opts.push("--filesystem=ext4".into()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this shouldn't be hardcoded here...actually "filesystem choice" is a whole new dimension to the matrix in general.
We absolutely should be testing (and support!) e.g. "insecure" (fsverity disabled) composefs-rs storage too.
I think we don't even have a mechanism to specify that, but we should. I guess it could be part of the install config?
|
|
||
| [group('core')] | ||
| test-composefs bootloader: | ||
| just variant=composefs test-tmt --composefs-backend --bootloader {{bootloader}} \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Per above I think we can attach "supports composefs" as metadata to tests instead
2 participants
No description provided.