3 Dec
2019
3 Dec
'19
12:06 p.m.
On Tue, 2019-12-03 at 11:50 +0100, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
It sounds like we can just provide install= unconditionally, same as we currently do with ks=? We'd have to verify doing so doesn't cause any unintended side-effects for existing guest types.
I'd rather have it done in a more explicit way, just for the sake of someone else trying to debug / understand the code later on.
A comment in the code will do just fine, in my opinion. And then, when we can start relying on a new enough virt-install, we can drop the workaround with minimal fuss. Our unconditional use of ks= could also benefit from being explained in a comment, by the way. I'll post a patch for that shortly. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization