[Libguestfs] [Bug 1046905] New: RFE: add argument to virt-sysprep to disable individual default operations
Richard W.M. Jones
rjones at redhat.com
Tue Jan 7 12:12:43 UTC 2014
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 11:16:08AM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote:
> On Friday 27 December 2013 10:58:15 you wrote:
> > virt-sysprep either runs with all default operations or a selected
> > list of operations with the --enable argument. A few times I've
> > found I'd like to use the default list, but minus one or two
> > operations in particular, however there's no easy way to specify
> > this.
> >
> > A --disable argument that took the default operation list and skipped
> > selected operations would be useful.
>
> A rough idea I had about this is adding a new --operations parameter,
> which would take a a comma-separated list of operations (just like the
> current --enable), but with the following differences:
> - a leading minus would disable the specified operation
> - it would recognize the meta-keywords "all" (for all the available
> operations) and "defaults" (for the ones enabled by default)
> Processing the list of operations would add/remove them from the current
> set of operations, bailing out whether the resulting set is empty (just
> like right now --enable rejects an empty string).
>
> This way, you could write e.g.:
> - --operations defaults,-hostname,user-account
> runs the default ones but not "hostname", and the non-default
> "user-account"
> - --operations all
> easy shortcut to run all the available operations
> and so on.
>
> --enable could just be an alias for --operations, or this new syntax
> could be added directly to --enable directly.
>
> Maybe I'm over-engineering, but IMHO seems a better way than potentially
> adding a --disable argument and deal with the order of
> --enable & --disable and their interactions.
Seems reasonable.
I guess only one --operations opt is allowed?
Or would we allow multiple and concatenate them together? So that
--operations foo,bar --operations -baz
would be equivalent to
--operations foo,bar,-baz
?
Multiple --operations could be useful for scripting, ie. it would let
shell users write:
opts="--operations all -a disk.img"
if [ $disable_foo ]; then opts="$opts --operations -foo"; fi
Another thing to test is whether the OCaml argument parser[1] can
handle '--operations -foo' without thinking that -foo is a separate
arg.
Rich.
[1] It is not as sophisticated as GNU getopt, and a very long way from
Perl & Python's amazing command line handling. See:
http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=5197
as an example of one of its shortcomings.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
More information about the Libguestfs
mailing list