> I'd consider focusing on using checkisomd5 as the main way to test if FMW > works ok. First the offline one and then online one running from the flash > drive before bootup.
That's actually a very good advice for the test case. As Martin showed me recently, running simply "checkisomd5 --verbose /dev/sdX" after you've written the image to /dev/sdX is actually a fully satisfactory verification that the image was written properly (or you could also do "cmp /dev/sdX image.iso"). Of course booting the thumb stick and letting it verify consistency from the syslinux menu is a bonus point. There's a potential issue here. Sometimes it can happen that the written partitions are automounted and some filesystem metadata are changed before unplugging (at least that's my guess). This happened to me several times during the last cycle, and the checksum verification then fails (but the installation proceeds completely OK). This happens also on Windows, according to Martin, and it's quite difficult to prevent it. We should mention it in the test case, but I'm not sure what advice we can give. We don't want to of course handwaive such issues completely, because they can also mean some data writing corruption (I found one such bug a few months back, and it was FMW's fault). > > If the integrity check passes, all other errors are either in the compose > process or the packages. Anything above this I would consider testing the > actual written image, not FMW. Yes. In our particular case, in the "Default boot and install" section, we also test default installation (anaconda), so I guess we can't optimize there. But for that particular test case, the offline/online verification should be enough, I believe. _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
