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 C758D1FF348 for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:15:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DF588779D; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:15:18 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:14:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Fiona Ebner , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20240416131909.2867605-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20240416131909.2867605-5-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <5f31c7b2-4c4f-4ad3-94d1-bbb86ded9f4f@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <5f31c7b2-4c4f-4ad3-94d1-bbb86ded9f4f@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.014 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage 4/9] ovf: implement parsing the ostype 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 4/17/24 13:32, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 16.04.24 um 15:18 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >> use the standards info about the ostypes to map to our own >> (see comment for link to the relevant part of the dmtf schema) >> >> every type that is not listed we map to 'other', so no need to have it >> in a list. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak >> > Reviewed-by: Fiona Ebner > >> diff --git a/src/test/run_ovf_tests.pl b/src/test/run_ovf_tests.pl >> index 1ef78cc..e949c15 100755 >> --- a/src/test/run_ovf_tests.pl >> +++ b/src/test/run_ovf_tests.pl >> @@ -59,13 +59,16 @@ print "\ntesting vm.conf extraction\n"; >> is($win2008->{qm}->{name}, 'Win2008-R2x64', 'win2008 VM name is correct'); >> is($win2008->{qm}->{memory}, '2048', 'win2008 VM memory is correct'); >> is($win2008->{qm}->{cores}, '1', 'win2008 VM cores are correct'); >> +is($win2008->{qm}->{ostype}, 'win7', 'win2008 VM ostype is correcty'); >> >> is($win10->{qm}->{name}, 'Win10-Liz', 'win10 VM name is correct'); >> is($win10->{qm}->{memory}, '6144', 'win10 VM memory is correct'); >> is($win10->{qm}->{cores}, '4', 'win10 VM cores are correct'); >> +is($win10->{qm}->{ostype}, 'other', 'win10 VM ostype is correct'); > > Yes, 'other', because the ovf config has id=1, but is there a special > reason why? Maybe worth a comment here and below to avoid potential > confusion. my guess is that the ovf spec did not include windows 10 yet (or something similar like the esxi exporter not knowing the newest spec) and i did not want to change the testcase just for this > >> >> is($win10noNs->{qm}->{name}, 'Win10-Liz', 'win10 VM (no default rasd NS) name is correct'); >> is($win10noNs->{qm}->{memory}, '6144', 'win10 VM (no default rasd NS) memory is correct'); >> is($win10noNs->{qm}->{cores}, '4', 'win10 VM (no default rasd NS) cores are correct'); >> +is($win10noNs->{qm}->{ostype}, 'other', 'win10 VM (no default rasd NS) ostype is correct'); >> >> done_testing(); _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel