On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 07:39:31AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 01:39:05PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Extract and somewhat generalize the recipe for the $(PHYSICAL_MACHINE) target to a separate shell script. In preparation for the multiple steps we're going to introduce later, redirect virt-builder to a temp file at first (placed in the same directory as the finally expected disk image), and rename that file upon success.
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> ---
+++ b/make-physical-machine.sh @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +#!/bin/bash -
See the response in the other thread about not needing the - here. Are we sure that /bin/bash is on all systems where this script will be run, or is it better as '#!/bin/env bash'?
Realisticly virt-p2v only makes sense on Linux, both when used to prepare the P2V ISO, as well as the environment in which the ISO boots. eg: Using virt-p2v on (say) FreeBSD to prepare a Linux ISO? The FreeBSD folk would prefer that the built ISO contained FreeBSD, but that would require a small mountain of work.
+ +set -e -u -C
My personal opinion is that 'set -e' is a crutch that should be avoided because of its unintended interaction with functions; but I'm not adamant enough about it to tell people to rip it out of scripts. For short scripts, like this one, it's easy enough to check that we aren't tripping over any of -e's surprises.
I'm confused too: what's the problem with set -e? Compared to _not_ having set -e which allows scripts to continue running after errors. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com nbdkit - Flexible, fast NBD server with plugins https://gitlab.com/nbdkit/nbdkit