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
Ian Wienand
5abb4a4f12 Initial centos7 support
Initial support for a centos7 image.

This is separate to rhel7 because the major differences are things
like repo and image locations, which are always going to be different.
We should merge any real changes into the redhat-common layers.

Apart from the added support files in centos7/*, the other change is
mostly modifications to redhat-common's extract-image to handle
different partition layouts of the centos7 image.

Change-Id: I943abe5ff0a803f36eda266a79af0d9220edcae7
2014-07-16 10:43:05 +10:00