From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5738C94285 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:36:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 34F3A391F6 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:36:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:36:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F3D6A46758 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:36:12 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <2c2261b3-380e-4c0f-8077-bff387caaf9d@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:36:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Christoph Heiss References: <20240209105629.285910-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <20240209105629.285910-2-c.heiss@proxmox.com> From: Aaron Lauterer In-Reply-To: <20240209105629.285910-2-c.heiss@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.065 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH installer 1/4] low-level: initialize UI backend for 'dump-env' subcommand too X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2024 12:36:14 -0000 Is this something I should consider for the new dump-udev subcommand as well? https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2024-January/061433.html On 2/9/24 11:55, Christoph Heiss wrote: > Some detection routines might try to log things and call some > Proxmox::Ui functions all the way down, so just initialize it with the > stdio backend to avoid errors. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Heiss > --- > proxmox-low-level-installer | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/proxmox-low-level-installer b/proxmox-low-level-installer > index d127a40..2848295 100755 > --- a/proxmox-low-level-installer > +++ b/proxmox-low-level-installer > @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ Proxmox::Log::init("/tmp/install-low-level-${cmd}.log"); > > my $env = Proxmox::Install::ISOEnv::get(); > if ($cmd eq 'dump-env') { > + Proxmox::UI::init_stdio({}, $env); > > my $out_dir = $env->{locations}->{run}; > make_path($out_dir);