Bug 1130227

Summary:	storage proposal weirdness
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE Distribution	Reporter:	Steffen Winterfeldt <snwint>
Component:	YaST2	Assignee:	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.