On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:06 PM, James Laska wrote: > On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 18:45 +0800, He Rui wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 11:30 +0300, Frederick William New wrote: > > > > Comment: > > > > > > > > Replying to [comment:1 rhe]: > > > > > Agree. add a expected result in each kickstart test like： > > > > > > > > > > * > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Http_Server_Ks_Cfg > > > > > > > > The added expected result is: [[BR]] > > > > # Anaconda should not prompt for user interaction if ks.cfg is not > > > > specified > > > > > > It seems to me that if you don't specify a ks.cfg Anaconda is going to do a > whole bunch of prompting. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > That's right, what I was trying to say is if the ks.cfg is intact or if > > you don't intend to ignore something in the file, Anaconda should not > > prompt for user interaction. Sorry for the poor description. I might > > correct the above to: > > > > # Anaconda should not prompt for user interaction if the ks.cfg is > > intact > > > > Feel free to adjust the words. > > I'd probably avoid getting too specific about what kickstart commands > are used for this test. That seems like a good exercise for future > tests, or amendments to existing tests. The general idea of honoring > the provided commands seems sane. > > Howabout rephrasing as ... ? > > # The installer honors the kickstart commands provided in the > {{filename|ks.cfg}} file. If sufficient commands are provided to fully > automate an installation, the installer must not prompt for user input. That sounds good, thanks. Perhaps the same text could be copied into all test cases in Kickstart Delivery - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Kickstart_Delivery Fred -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
