Bug 1130227

Summary: storage proposal weirdness
Product: [openSUSE] openSUSE Distribution Reporter: Steffen Winterfeldt <snwint>
Component: YaST2Assignee: YaST Team <yast-internal>
Status: CONFIRMED --- QA Contact: Jiri Srain <jsrain>
Severity: Normal    
Priority: P5 - None CC: ancor
Version: Leap 15.1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: Other   
OS: Other   
URL: https://trello.com/c/5ql4ijMp/
Whiteboard:
Found By: --- Services Priority:
Business Priority: Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: --- IT Deployment: ---
Attachments: test case
y2log
rspec output

Description Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:20:18 UTC
While reviewing some test scripts for bug 1094927 I came across this one

https://github.com/yast/yast-storage-ng/blob/master/test/y2storage/initial_guided_proposal_test.rb#L200-L213

It passes but the proposed layout is wrong.

With the fix for bug 1094927 it passes and the layout is correct so this looks
like a non-issue - BUT the way it failed originally is interesting and might
point to a weakness in the proposal process.

I'll attach the singled-out test case and the y2log it originally produces.
Comment 1 Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:22:38 UTC
Created attachment 800967 [details]
test case
Comment 2 Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:23:08 UTC
Created attachment 800968 [details]
y2log
Comment 3 Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:25:22 UTC
Created attachment 800969 [details]
rspec output
Comment 4 Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:33:37 UTC
As you see in the log the problem is that (as root is on gpt) it needs a
bios_boot partition. But due to circumstances it tries to create it on some
other disk which happens to be msdos partitioned.

This fails, which is ok - but this also leaves a good-for-nothing half-finished
/dev/sdc1 partition in the proposal. Which is imho not ok.

It will not happen again in this particular case with the fix for the above
mentioned bug but I think maybe we are not correctly backing out of errors
generally.
Comment 5 Steffen Winterfeldt 2019-03-22 14:38:07 UTC
Just noted a minor incorrectness: with the new code it also does not pass but
for another reason - the layout is correct, however.