Tails

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-12 03:45:00

• blocks #8538 added

#3 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-12 04:10:38

• related to Feature #5623: Tails Installer should refuse upgrading a device that hasn't Tails installed added

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-18 02:00:16

• blocks Feature #8557: Have Tails Installer uploaded and accepted into Debian added

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-18 03:41:20

• blocks Feature #7563: Update the automated test suite for Jessie ISO images added

#7 Updated by Anonymous 2015-11-19 03:05:43

• Assignee set to intrigeri
• QA Check set to Ready for QA
• Feature Branch set to 451f:feature/jessie

The function which tests if the USB device used is a Tails, does not do more than check the partition table, filesystem and disk label. The latter did not work correctly. I pushed a fix for this to feature/jessie, and built and tested tails-installer-4.4.3.
This latest deb package also contains Alan’s latest UI improvements.

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-19 05:07:30

• Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
• QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Info Needed

> The function which tests if the USB device used is a Tails, does not do more than check the partition table, filesystem and disk label.

It checks the GPT partition label vs. the one we want (and the one we want is in self.label which could be reused, but for some reason it’s hardcoded ‘Tails’ here. Whatever).

> I pushed a fix for this to feature/jessie,

Assuming you mean:

-           and device['label'] == 'Tails':
+           and self.label == 'Tails':

… my understanding is that this updated condition will always be verified: self.label is initialized to config['branding']['partition_label'] ( 'Tails') on top of @class TailsInstallerCreator@, and I don't think it's modified anywhere else. So what this test now does is essentially @'Tails' ‘Tails’@, no?

I may be wrong, but it looks like device_can_be_upgraded will now return True if all other conditions are met, regardless of the target GPT partition label.

> and built and tested tails-installer-4.4.3.

I assume you tested that the bug I reported is fixed by essentially dropping the test. I’d like to make sure you also test that we’re not replacing this regression with another one (namely: Tails Installer allows “upgrading” a device that does not contain a Tails, which is what this code was supposed to guard against (Feature #5623)).

I admit I’m doing lots of guesswork here, and didn’t actually verify anything. If you actually tested this and think I’m wrong, just let me know and I’ll do my homework :)

#9 Updated by Anonymous 2015-11-19 08:34:52

• Assignee set to intrigeri
• QA Check changed from Info Needed to Ready for QA
• Feature Branch changed from 451f:feature/jessie to 451f:liveusb-creator/feature/jessie and 451f:liveusb-creator/tails/jessie

I’ve added the correct partition label property, as worked out earlier today. Thanks for your help on that one. Please review.

#12 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-25 02:21:56

• Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
• % Done changed from 0 to 50

I indeed can’t reproduce the bug in tails-installer_4.4.4 :) Not tested other use cases manually, so more confidence will come when running the test suite => I’ll upload a .deb soonish, tht should fix both Bug #10538 and this very ticket.

#14 Updated by intrigeri 2015-11-25 05:10:30

• Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
• Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
• % Done changed from 50 to 100
• QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass

Tested manually because Bug #10660 breaks the corresponding automated tests => works! :)