From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A36101FF167 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:02:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 001D49633; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:02:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:02:04 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20240730151540.308217-1-m.limbeck@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Mira Limbeck In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.343 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH v3 qemu-server] fix 4493: cloud-init: fix generated Windows config 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 7/30/24 21:14, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 30/07/2024 um 17:15 schrieb Mira Limbeck: >> Cloudbase-Init, a cloud-init reimplementation for Windows, supports only >> a subset of the configuration options of cloud-init. Some features >> depend on support by the Metadata Service (ConfigDrive2 here) and have >> further limitations [0]. >> >> To support a basic setup the following changes were made: >> - password is saved as plaintext for any Windows guests (ostype) >> - DNS servers are added to each of the interfaces >> - SSH public keys are passed via metadata >> >> Network and metadata generation for Cloudbase-Init is separate from the >> default ConfigDrive2 one so as to not interfere with any other OSes that >> depend on the current ConfigDrive2 implementation. >> >> DNS search domains were removed because Cloudbase-Init's ENI parser >> doesn't handle it at all. >> The password set via `cipassword` is used for the Admin user configured >> in the cloudbase-init.conf in the guest while the `ciuser` parameter is >> ignored. The Admin user has to be set in the cloudbase-init.conf file >> instead. >> Specifying a different user does not work. >> >> For the password to work the `ostype` needs to be any Windows variant >> before `cipassword` is set. Otherwise the password will be encrypted and >> the encrypted password used as plaintext password in the guest. >> >> The `citype` needs to be `configdrive2`, which is the default for >> Windows guests, for the generated configs to be compatible with >> Cloudbase-Init. >> >> [0] https://cloudbase-init.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html >> >> Signed-off-by: Mira Limbeck >> --- >> v3: >> - removed `use URI` since we already `use URI::Escape` >> - sent a separate patch adding `liburi-perl` dependency in d/control >> v2: >> - unchanged >> >> PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 13 ++--- >> PVE/QemuServer/Cloudinit.pm | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 2 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) >> >> > > applied series, thanks! > > Some tests would be nice for this CI stuff in general though, e.g. taking > in CI properties and mocking the write/apply parts to test if the resulting > output matches our expectation could already be a simple regression test > providing some basic safety net. Will look into it _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel