Commit graph

4 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Ian Wienand
97c01e48ed Move elements & lib relative to diskimage_builder package
Currently we have all our elements and library files in a top-level
directory and install them into
<root>/share/diskimage-builder/[elements|lib] (where root is either /
or the root of a virtualenv).

The problem with this is that editable/development installs (pip -e)
do *not* install data_files.  Thus we have no canonical location to
look for elements -- leading to the various odd things we do such as a
whole bunch of guessing at the top of disk-image-create and having a
special test-loader in tests/test_elements.py so we can run python
unit tests on those elements that have it.

data_files is really the wrong thing to use for what are essentially
assets of the program.  data_files install works well for things like
config-files, init.d files or dropping documentation files.

By moving the elements under the diskimage_builder package, we always
know where they are relative to where we import from.  In fact,
pkg_resources has an api for this which we wrap in the new
diskimage_builder/paths.py helper [1].

We use this helper to find the correct path in the couple of places we
need to find the base-elements dir, and for the paths to import the
library shell functions.

Elements such as svc-map and pkg-map include python unit-tests, which
we do not need tests/test_elements.py to special-case load any more.
They just get found automatically by the normal subunit loader.

I have a follow-on change (I69ca3d26fede0506a6353c077c69f735c8d84d28)
to move disk-image-create to a regular python entry-point.

Unfortunately, this has to move to work with setuptools.  You'd think
a symlink under diskimage_builder/[elements|lib] would work, but it
doesn't.

[1] this API handles stuff like getting files out of .zip archive
modules, which we don't do.  Essentially for us it's returning
__file__.

Change-Id: I5e3e3c97f385b1a4ff2031a161a55b231895df5b
2016-11-01 17:27:41 -07:00
John Trowbridge
49baaa4114 Remove EPEL as hardcoded dependency of centos elements
The previous commit removes dkms from the base element, which
means the centos elements should no longer have a dependency on
EPEL.  Therefore, we should not hardcode the epel dependency.  It
can still be included in image builds as desired by using the epel
element explicitly.

Co-Authored-By: Ben Nemec <bnemec@redhat.com>
Change-Id: Iceff0d5bedd9816adfd2990970e7c216b67b6bd0
2016-09-12 11:42:55 -05:00
Pino Toscano
7c74084eca centos/centos7: switch to epel element
Instead of manually creating epel.repo files, make use of the epel
element, which will properly install epel-release.

Change-Id: Iea7b389bc1ade716c622fd39d5e7dcf119dcb447
2015-05-06 15:50:09 +02:00
Abel Lopez
8026dda8a0 CentOS 6 Element
This is the centos element, which builds CentOS 6.

There are a couple of modifications to redhat-common because
the version of tar in el6 doesn't support --xattrs-include.

There is a change to both pkg-map and svc-map to add 'centos'
to the 'redhat' family.

Also explicitly have to install cloud-utils growroot and
dracut growpart for proper fsresize at instance launch.

Also sets the DIB_EXTLINUX variable because there is no grub2
for this distro.

Change-Id: Iffd57bce1484c43c2cffcbdb37b602185216e63a
2015-03-03 23:09:45 -08:00