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 EB3AEFE76 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:55:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CA25818BD2 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:54:37 +0200 (CEST) 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 ; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:54:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EAD7943075 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:54:35 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:54:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Friedrich Weber References: <20230724113348.120113-1-f.weber@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20230724113348.120113-1-f.weber@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.076 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. [qemuserver.pm, proxmox.com, qemu.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH qemu-server] cloudinit: allow non-root users to set ciupgrade option 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: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 09:55:08 -0000 On 24/07/2023 13:33, Friedrich Weber wrote: > The new ciupgrade option was missing in $cloudinitoptions in > PVE::API2::Qemu, so $check_vm_modify_config_perm defaulted to > requiring root@pam for modifying the option. To fix this, add > ciupgrade to $cloudinitoptions. This also fixes an issue where > ciupgrade was missing in the output of `qm cloudinit pending`, > as it also relies on $cloudinitoptions. > > This issue was originally reported in the forum [0]. > > Also add a comment to avoid similar issues when adding new options in > the future. > > [0]: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/131043/ > > Signed-off-by: Friedrich Weber > --- > > Notes: > Not sure if this is the proper fix. Instead of maintaining two lists > of cloudinit options, we could generate $cloudinitoptions from > $confdesc_cloudinit? It's not making anything worse and is a good stop-gap, but yeah those list is a bit too distant from the schema definition. How about a get_vm_user_cloudinit_options helper located directly below the format definition, filtering out those keys that do not make sense, or are off limits, and use that? Maybe with some wider clean-up for the others? But this is also a bit thankless work and would definitively need some test harness to ensure no regression gets in. > > PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 1 + > PVE/QemuServer.pm | 1 + > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) > > applied, thanks!