After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 666019 - Improvements to Windows Server 2008 express install
Improvements to Windows Server 2008 express install
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-boxes
Classification: Applications
Component: installer
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: --
Assigned To: GNOME Boxes maintainer(s)
GNOME Boxes maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2011-12-12 18:22 UTC by Zeeshan Ali
Modified: 2016-03-31 14:00 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Specify language for Windows 2008 express install (1.23 KB, patch)
2011-12-12 18:22 UTC, Zeeshan Ali
rejected Details | Review
Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file (1.05 KB, patch)
2011-12-12 18:22 UTC, Zeeshan Ali
committed Details | Review

Description Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-12 18:22:20 UTC
While these patches improve the express installation method for Windows Server 2008, we still need a bit more work to make it completely automated. The setup still asks for things (e.g accepting of license, disk drive etc) that has been specified in the XML.
Comment 1 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-12 18:22:22 UTC
Created attachment 203274 [details] [review]
Specify language for Windows 2008 express install
Comment 2 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-12 18:22:27 UTC
Created attachment 203275 [details] [review]
Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file

This was supposed to be removed at the same time as for win7 as this
causes unattended installation to fail.
Comment 3 Marc-Andre Lureau 2011-12-13 14:23:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> Created an attachment (id=203275) [details] [review]
> Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file
> 
> This was supposed to be removed at the same time as for win7 as this
> causes unattended installation to fail.

why was it added in the first place?
Comment 4 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-13 14:31:41 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Created an attachment (id=203275) [details] [review] [details] [review]
> > Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file
> > 
> > This was supposed to be removed at the same time as for win7 as this
> > causes unattended installation to fail.
> 
> why was it added in the first place?

Because it was copied verbatim from Oz project.
Comment 5 Marc-Andre Lureau 2011-12-13 15:17:09 UTC
Why would they use it then?
Comment 6 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-13 16:21:36 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> Why would they use it then?

Oz? how would I know? I removed this section from win7 on the suggestion of an Oz developer and all I know is that it made unattended install to work. Moreover, we don't need this section anyway.
Comment 7 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-16 17:09:02 UTC
ACK?
Comment 8 Marc-Andre Lureau 2011-12-16 18:56:36 UTC
Review of attachment 203275 [details] [review]:

Isn't it supposed to be where is the product key?
Oz does a substitution of this fields:

keys = xp.xpathEval('/ms:unattend/ms:settings/ms:component/ms:ProductKey')
keys[0].setContent(self.tdl.key)
Comment 9 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-16 19:00:24 UTC
(In reply to comment #8)
> Review of attachment 203275 [details] [review]:
> 
> Isn't it supposed to be where is the product key?
> Oz does a substitution of this fields:
> 
> keys = xp.xpathEval('/ms:unattend/ms:settings/ms:component/ms:ProductKey')
> keys[0].setContent(self.tdl.key)

I know what Oz does. I just know for a fact that this are not needed and only breaks the automated installation. There is a reason I only added the input of product key for older windows and not Win7 and 2008.
Comment 10 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-16 22:56:46 UTC
Comment on attachment 203275 [details] [review]
Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file

Attachment 203275 [details] pushed as 6beab28 - Remove 'specialize' pass from win2k8 unattended file
Comment 11 Zeeshan Ali 2011-12-16 23:13:48 UTC
Review of attachment 203274 [details] [review]:

Yikes, this wasn't supposed to be here. It is already in a separate bug: bug#666037.