IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Since `/tmp` might be on tmpfs, so we'd lose it on reboot. But we have
tests that need it to persist across reboots.
Closes: #1531
Approved by: miabbott
We're looking to embed an ostree commit inside a container image,
to make it easier to transport around with other images.
Conceptually here the host system is tracking a container (just
like for rojig we're tracking an RPM). This is the first step
towards making that support nicer; tooling can do
`rebase --custom-origin-url oscontainer://quay.io/exampleos@sha256:...`
and have that show up in `rpm-ostree status`.
There are two values, one intended to be machine readable (like
the `ostree://` and `rojig://` and one for humans which we
display when an admin types `rpm-ostree upgrade`.
This builds on prior work in
27bd7b97bb from #1396 .
Closes: #1406
Approved by: jlebon
First the pinning tests would try to pin a staged deployment,
and some of the later tests here depend on a subtle way on the
state of the system. It's tempting to do a `reset` before each one
and reboot but this makes things work.
There's some additional assertions here as I went through and
was debugging.
Prep for making staging the default.
Closes: #1438
Approved by: jlebon
With the new support for pinning deployments, we need to also update
rpm-ostree to clean up the transient state as is now done in the ostree
sysroot upgrader.
This addresses that issue as well as tries to be a little cleaner in how
we clean up other transient state. Notably, we add a new helper function
to `RpmOstreeOrigin` to do this for us and use it in the upgrader. In
other cases, we do want this transient information since it allows us to
describe the deployment.
Closes: https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/1595Closes: #1372
Approved by: cgwalters
Our test suite originated when package layering was still being
developed, but now that that's mature, the logic where layering
tests are distinct makes less sense.
The `basic` test had grown to really be a collection of many
miscellaneous things. Let's make that more explicit. Further,
let's avoid having each test suite grow too large; when a single
test fails we don't have an easy way to rerun just that test,
so a crude way to have faster local iteration is to split into groups.
My plan is to reintroduce a `basic` test that covers the basics
of all functionality - update, deploy, layering, etc. The advanced/corner
cases of layering like the `rm -rf /` test would still live in a
`test-layering.sh` or so.
Closes: #1336
Approved by: jlebon
