We accepted https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241632 as an F39 Final blocker, but we have no formal test case for this. If we care about it so much, we probably should have one.
The test should be in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Kickstart_test_cases and added to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Installation_test_matrix#Kickstart . I'd call it something like QA:Testcase_kickstart_partial , I guess.
Then we should automate it in openQA, once it exists. I'll file a ticket for that too.
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/os-autoinst-distri-fedora/issue/308 for openQA side.
The wiki test case is here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_partial_kickstarts
If we care about it so much, we probably should have one.
Just a note, "partial kickstart" wasn't an important part of the decision, at least for me. Even in a fully automated case, not showing any display is a terrible behavior. On top of that, I believe I tested it with a fully automated test case, but it seemed like it stayed in the main menu (but I could only guess by the cursor changing shapes!), and I had no idea why, because it was all black. It just breaks kickstart installs completely, because you can't even develop and test your kickstart, since you get no visible output, no error messages, etc.
I don't mind having a specific test case for partial installs, of course. Just wanted to clarify the background.
@sumantrom I would prefer if you go with the name I proposed, because it follows the names of other kickstart tests better. There is no point in making "kickstarts" plural, either.
@adamw done. the new tc is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_kickstart_partial
Thanks. So...
The sample kickstart left out storage, so that it needed to be configured.
Log in to comment on this ticket.