add a test about boot option descriptions #788
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ensuring we don't inflict Omicron#5112 on instances due to our own changes: boot option descriptions are load-bearing, so we've changed them make sure we think through the consequences. i'm pleasantly surprised that
EfiLoadOptionjust.. worked here. yay.the procedure that gets us names we see for guest disks today is a bit subtle, but i've tried to document it fully to pair with the expectation in this test.
there are also specific conditions where failing this assertion is fine - say, if we've done #787, or changed how we're processing UEFI boot variables. just, as things are right now, we're surprisingly dependent on dancing with OVMF in exactly the same way every time a guest boots.