[libvirt] [jenkins-ci PATCH] lcitool: Don't warn when using package manager directly
We only do this when performing operations that the corresponding Ansible module doesn't support, so we know what we're doing and don't want warnings to show up. Note that while only the dnf and yum modules complain at the moment, we might as well use warn=no everywhere so that we're already covered in case in the future the pkgng module starts detecting this as well. Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com> --- guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml b/guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml index 8fe114e..e0efe5d 100644 --- a/guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml +++ b/guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml @@ -52,11 +52,15 @@ - name: Update installed packages shell: '{{ package_manager }} update && {{ package_manager }} upgrade -y' + args: + warn: no when: - package_format == 'pkg' - name: Clean up packages after update shell: '{{ package_manager }} clean packages -y && {{ package_manager }} autoremove -y' + args: + warn: no when: - package_format == 'rpm' @@ -69,6 +73,8 @@ - name: Clean up packages after update shell: '{{ package_manager }} clean -y && {{ package_manager }} autoremove -y' + args: + warn: no when: - package_format == 'pkg' -- 2.21.0
On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 15:06 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
We only do this when performing operations that the corresponding Ansible module doesn't support, so we know what we're doing and don't want warnings to show up.
Note that while only the dnf and yum modules complain at the moment, we might as well use warn=no everywhere so that we're already covered in case in the future the pkgng module starts detecting this as well.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com> --- guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
*** PING HERE *** -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 13:52:23 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 15:06 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
We only do this when performing operations that the corresponding Ansible module doesn't support, so we know what we're doing and don't want warnings to show up.
Note that while only the dnf and yum modules complain at the moment, we might as well use warn=no everywhere so that we're already covered in case in the future the pkgng module starts detecting this as well.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com> --- guests/playbooks/update/tasks/base.yml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
*** PING HERE ***
I think you can push it under the "nobody cares" rule.
On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 14:20 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 13:52:23 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 15:06 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: *** PING HERE ***
I think you can push it under the "nobody cares" rule.
That's a weird way to spell "trivial" O:-) Which, looking at the patch again, is pretty clear it qualifies for, so I've followed your suggestion and pushed it. Thank you for your not-quite-a-review! ;) -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 14:38:31 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 14:20 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 13:52:23 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 15:06 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: *** PING HERE ***
I think you can push it under the "nobody cares" rule.
That's a weird way to spell "trivial" O:-)
Which, looking at the patch again, is pretty clear it qualifies for, so I've followed your suggestion and pushed it.
Thank you for your not-quite-a-review! ;)
Yeah, I'm sorry for the spelling of "trivial" but in cases of these subprojects which don't get as much review it should be okay to use one's own judgement to push the patch even for less trivial changes. Basically treat a certain amount of silence as "no complaints".
participants (2)
-
Andrea Bolognani -
Peter Krempa