Bug #7682
Scientific Linux operatingsystemrelease is incorrect, other facts missing
| Status: | Closed | Start date: | 05/26/2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: |  Adrien Thebo |
% Done: | 0% |
|
| Category: | library | |||
| Target version: | 1.6.1 | |||
| Keywords: | Affected Facter version: | 1.5.9 | ||
| Branch: | https://github.com/adrienthebo/facter/tree/ticket%2Fmaster%2F7682 | |||
| Votes: | 2 |
Description
# diff facter-1.5.8 facter-1.5.9
5d4
< hardwareisa => x86_64
17d16
< macaddress => 00:16:3E:64:2E:18
25,26c25,27
< operatingsystem => RedHat
< operatingsystemrelease => 6.0
---
> operatingsystem => Scientific
> operatingsystemrelease => 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64
47d50
< uniqueid => 0a0a0929
# ls -l /etc/*release
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 38 Feb 24 13:12 /etc/redhat-release
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 14 May 2 19:16 /etc/system-release -> redhat-release
# cat /etc/redhat-release
Scientific Linux release 6.0 (Carbon)
$operatingsystemrelease should be 6.0
Where RedHat is used in other places, Scientific should also be in the list. The attached patch does that.
Related issues
History
Updated by Todd Zullinger 12 months ago
FWIW, we added this patch to the 1.5.9 update which should be in Fedora and EPEL testing repositories soon. That may help with testing.
Updated by Ben Hughes 12 months ago
- Status changed from Unreviewed to Requires CLA to be signed
This has come up before and it’s not something we’re going to introduce to a 1.5.x series patch due to completely smashing POLA I’m afraid. Changing how many people have their manifests written currently on a point release would not be welcomed.
What we are looking to do is introduce an “osfamily” or similar fact, and then have more specific “operatingsystem” facts. Have a look at #6679 for more details.
(saying that, thank you for the patch, and we’ll use it for 1.6.x, if you could sign the CLA please).
Updated by Adrien Thebo 12 months ago
- Branch set to https://github.com/adrienthebo/facter/tree/ticket%2Fmaster%2F7682
I’ve committed the submitted patch to git and added a minor amendment to the submitted patch to add support for the operatingsystemrelease fact.
Updated by Todd Zullinger 11 months ago
Ben Hughes wrote:
This has come up before and it’s not something we’re going to introduce to a 1.5.x series patch due to completely smashing POLA I’m afraid. Changing how many people have their manifests written currently on a point release would not be welcomed.
It’s not considered a simple bug that facter operatinsystemrelease is returning the kernel version rather than what anyone sane would expect it to return? That’s the greater POLA violation I would think. :)
It may be worth noting that we changed the operatingsystemrelease fact during the 1.5.x series to make RHEL and CentOS return the same values. See bug #2060, where RHEL was changed to present the full OS release, including the minor version. This change went into 1.5.7. Perhaps there was some backlash from that which makes fixing this obvious bug on Scientific Linux distasteful? I’d be shocked if there were folks using SL that wanted the fact to differ from the same fact on RHEL or CentOS.
Unrelated, wouldn’t it be better to use the —author option to git commit to better reflect the patch authorship? (And make it easier to track past authors, should anyone wish to do so when asking questions about the code or when doing other history tasks in git?)
Anyway, the discussion of which branch to get this on it probably moot now that 1.6.0 is out. I was just reminded of this ticket and figured some discussion might provide a friendly poke to Orion about the CLA, so we can get it committed to the main repos for the next 1.6.x release. :)
Updated by Orion Poplawski 11 months ago
I believe I have just signed the CLA.
Updated by Adrien Thebo 11 months ago
- Status changed from Requires CLA to be signed to In Topic Branch Pending Review
Thanks for signing that! Rewrote the patch to properly attribute Orion as the author.
Updated by Orion Poplawski 10 months ago
Looks like this didn’t make it into 1.6.0. Will it make it into the 1.6.X series?
Updated by Tom Brown 9 months ago
This is strange…
PARTS of the patch made it into 1.6.0 … e.g. operatingsystem.rb but NOT operatingsystemrelease.rb ?? I got a rude shock when updating to the rpmforge 1.6.0 version of factor suddenly broke my manifests…
[root@nine ~]# facter | grep ^operating operatingsystem => Scientific operatingsystemrelease => 2.6.32-71.el6.i686
The rpmforge folks PULLED out the working patch because “upstream” included it… or PART OF IT :( as the case may be.
-Tom
Updated by Adrien Thebo 9 months ago
It looks like this issue partially duplicates #6679. commit:d718af449fc30585fcc672861077ec9045a4ef03 added support for the operatingsystem fact, but not the operatingsystemrelease fact that this patch supplied.
Updated by Andrew Elwell 9 months ago
hi – is it too late to slip in a second update to this, ie detect ‘scientific linux cern’ (which is subtly different from the vanilla version)
# lsb_release --all
LSB Version: :core-4.0-amd64:core-4.0-noarch:graphics-4.0-amd64:graphics-4.0-noarch:printing-4.0-amd64:printing-4.0-noarch
Distributor ID: ScientificCERNSLC
Description: Scientific Linux CERN SLC release 5.7 (Boron)
Release: 5.7
Codename: Boron
Updated by James Turnbull 9 months ago
- Status changed from In Topic Branch Pending Review to Needs Decision
- Assignee set to Adrien Thebo
Adrien – up to you.
Updated by Adrien Thebo 9 months ago
I would like to get this wrapped up before we add any more features, but I’ve made #9260 to track scientific linux cern support.
Updated by Adrien Thebo 9 months ago
- Status changed from Needs Decision to In Topic Branch Pending Review
Updated by Adrien Thebo 9 months ago
- Status changed from In Topic Branch Pending Review to Merged - Pending Release
Updated by Matthaus Litteken 9 months ago
- Status changed from Merged - Pending Release to Closed
- Target version set to 1.6.1
Released in 1.6.1rc2