Best way to install guest when it is not listed in output of osinfo-query os
Hello all, I would like to install Debian Bullseye using virt-install, as part of the command I usually specify the OS used with the option '--os-variant'. This works great untill Buster ('debian10'), but now the guest is Bullseye ('debian11') and is not listed in the output of 'osinfo-query os' (1). If I don't use the '--os-variant' flag I get the following warning: "WARNING No operating system detected, VM performance may suffer. Specify an OS with --os-variant for optimal results." Should I ignore the warning or what is the best way forward to install a Debian Bullseye guest? Both the host and the guest are Debian 11. 1) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/12/msg00742.html -- John Doe
On 12/20/21 06:52, john doe wrote:
Hello all,
I would like to install Debian Bullseye using virt-install, as part of the command I usually specify the OS used with the option '--os-variant'. This works great untill Buster ('debian10'), but now the guest is Bullseye ('debian11') and is not listed in the output of 'osinfo-query os' (1).
If I don't use the '--os-variant' flag I get the following warning:
"WARNING No operating system detected, VM performance may suffer. Specify an OS with --os-variant for optimal results."
Should I ignore the warning or what is the best way forward to install a Debian Bullseye guest?
Both the host and the guest are Debian 11.
1) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/12/msg00742.html
Debian 11 was added into the osinfo-db roughly 4 months ago: https://gitlab.com/libosinfo/osinfo-db/-/commit/d729bd193947cc377c5ffc054222... I'm not sure who maintains the package in debian, but I'd ask them to refresh the package. Meanwhile, as a workaround I think it's safe to use debian10 as --os-variant. Michal
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 06:52:46AM +0100, john doe wrote:
Hello all,
I would like to install Debian Bullseye using virt-install, as part of the command I usually specify the OS used with the option '--os-variant'. This works great untill Buster ('debian10'), but now the guest is Bullseye ('debian11') and is not listed in the output of 'osinfo-query os' (1).
If I don't use the '--os-variant' flag I get the following warning:
"WARNING No operating system detected, VM performance may suffer. Specify an OS with --os-variant for optimal results."
Should I ignore the warning or what is the best way forward to install a Debian Bullseye guest?
Both the host and the guest are Debian 11.
1) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/12/msg00742.html
You can just use '--os-variant debian10', it will work fine. Alternatively, you can install a newer version of the osinfo database by using osinfo-db-import. Doing so is probably overkill for your use case. Pino, do you think it would make sense to rebase osinfo-db in the next Debian 11 update? Or at least cherry-pick the debian11 entry so that things work as expected when creating a Debian 11 VM on a Debian 11 host? https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980744 was AFAICT intended to achieve just that. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 03:26:09AM -0800, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 06:52:46AM +0100, john doe wrote:
Hello all,
I would like to install Debian Bullseye using virt-install, as part of the command I usually specify the OS used with the option '--os-variant'. This works great untill Buster ('debian10'), but now the guest is Bullseye ('debian11') and is not listed in the output of 'osinfo-query os' (1).
If I don't use the '--os-variant' flag I get the following warning:
"WARNING No operating system detected, VM performance may suffer. Specify an OS with --os-variant for optimal results."
Should I ignore the warning or what is the best way forward to install a Debian Bullseye guest?
Both the host and the guest are Debian 11.
1) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/12/msg00742.html
You can just use '--os-variant debian10', it will work fine.
Alternatively, you can install a newer version of the osinfo database by using osinfo-db-import. Doing so is probably overkill for your use case.
Pino, do you think it would make sense to rebase osinfo-db in the next Debian 11 update? Or at least cherry-pick the debian11 entry so that things work as expected when creating a Debian 11 VM on a Debian 11 host? https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980744 was AFAICT intended to achieve just that.
Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the other distros?
-- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the other distros?
I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably just a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :) In addition to that, considering that there already entries for Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable might make sense too. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
On 12/21/2021 10:41 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the other distros?
I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably just a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)
In addition to that, considering that there already entries for Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable might make sense too.
That would be lovely if 'debian-unknown' and 'debian11' could be available on Bullseye!!! :) Is it intentional that the Debian URLs in the output of 'osinfo-query os' point to 'debian.org/debian/VERSION_ID' instead of 'debian.org/releases/VERSION_ID|VERSION_CODENAME'? -- John Doe
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 02:19:50PM +0100, john doe wrote:
On 12/21/2021 10:41 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the other distros?
I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably just a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)
In addition to that, considering that there already entries for Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable might make sense too.
That would be lovely if 'debian-unknown' and 'debian11' could be available on Bullseye!!! :)
Is it intentional that the Debian URLs in the output of 'osinfo-query os' point to 'debian.org/debian/VERSION_ID' instead of 'debian.org/releases/VERSION_ID|VERSION_CODENAME'?
The URLs are not a pointer to any specific resource. They are just an arbitrarily invented unique identifier & once released, we must never change any URL. By convention we pick a short "product name" as the first path component, because over time vendors have introduced new or parallel products. Thus '/releases/' would not be future proof. As an example, Fedora has both the traditional 'fedora' OS releases and 'silverblue'. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
participants (5)
-
Andrea Bolognani -
Daniel P. Berrangé -
john doe -
Martin Kletzander -
Michal Prívozník