http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1087449 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1087449#c1 Richard Brown changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Richard Brown --- Resolved as much as possible by https://github.com/yast/skelcd-control-openSUSE/pull/125 https://github.com/yast/skelcd-control-openSUSE/pull/126 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1087449 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1087449#c3 --- Comment #3 from Richard Brown --- (In reply to Ludwig Nussel from comment #2)

Looks like this makes snapshots no longer configurable. I thought on low disk space snapshots get disabled. Is that still the case?

When low disk space, snapshots get disabled by default, yes But on a Transactional Host with RO fs that can be a rather painful prospect - a read-only rootfs without snapshots means you have a read-only rootfs with no way of patching it Therefore the intended behaviour for the control.xml in this system_role is to require snapshots and not allow configuration of that Note this flag should only apply for the transactional system role - that is how I implemented it in the control.xml and how it's documented. That said, that flag is also currently broken (P1, YaST team on it - https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1087486 ) So right now, the 'do not configure snapshots for this system role' is a noop. I'm reasonably sure users will be okay most of the time, as I've been strict with the (working) min_disk requirements, perfectly matching Kubic where they work out well enough I was never able to notice the "disable snapshots" flag was non-functional. So right now, with those changes, I'm expecting YaST to report that a partition solution is not possible if their disk is too small, just like we have on Kubic. However med/long term (or whenever YaST fix that bug) my desire would be to relax the space requirements for ServerRO Leap/TW compared to Kubic. I would prefer they are more flexible like we're used to for Leap/TW, but still rely on the "at least require snapshots" rule to give the assurance that the role will always work. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.