Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values. both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Hello, You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide. Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO? Regards,Jirka On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE- RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values. both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
_______________________________________________Anaconda-devel-list mailing listAnaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values. both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO? rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
Vendy
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values.
both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 6:16 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO? rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
$ rpm -q --whatprovides system-release fedora-release-workstation-30-900.noarch $ rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release 900[
Vendy
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values.
both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:29 PM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 6:16 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
Anaconda reads the product name and the product version from /etc/system-release on Live ISO or from the .buildstamp file in network installations. See my comment about the .buildstamp file below. I think that all these problems are related.
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO? rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
$ rpm -q --whatprovides system-release fedora-release-workstation-30-900.noarch $ rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release 900[
It seems to be correct. The liveinst script should set the environment variable ANACONDA_ISFINAL to True before Anaconda is started.
Network installations use the IsFinal attribute of the .buildstamp file to determine the value of the flag, but Live ISO shouldn't have this file and should use ANACONDA_ISFINAL instead. The path to the .buildstamp file can be /.buildstamp, /tmp/product/.buildstamp or set by the environment variable PRODBUILDPATH. Could you check that these files do not exist on your ISO?
Otherwise, I would recommend to report a bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ and attach the Anaconda logs from the installation.
Vendy
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values.
both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Is it ok to modify /etc/os-release for re-branding purpose?
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 6:11 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:29 PM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 6:16 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
Anaconda reads the product name and the product version from /etc/system-release on Live ISO or from the .buildstamp file in network installations. See my comment about the .buildstamp file below. I think that all these problems are related.
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO? rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
$ rpm -q --whatprovides system-release fedora-release-workstation-30-900.noarch $ rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release 900[
It seems to be correct. The liveinst script should set the environment variable ANACONDA_ISFINAL to True before Anaconda is started.
Network installations use the IsFinal attribute of the .buildstamp file to determine the value of the flag, but Live ISO shouldn't have this file and should use ANACONDA_ISFINAL instead. The path to the .buildstamp file can be /.buildstamp, /tmp/product/.buildstamp or set by the environment variable PRODBUILDPATH. Could you check that these files do not exist on your ISO?
Otherwise, I would recommend to report a bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ and attach the Anaconda logs from the installation.
Vendy
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values.
both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 09:54 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Is it ok to modify /etc/os-release for re-branding purpose?
Hi Danishka Navin, Good question on a bad place. Adding Fedora devel list here, there could be someone who is able to answer you this question. Jirka
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 6:11 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:29 PM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 6:16 PM Vendula Poncova < vponcova@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin < danishka@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and -- version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live- workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30"
Anaconda reads the product name and the product version from /etc/system-release on Live ISO or from the .buildstamp file in network installations. See my comment about the .buildstamp file below. I think that all these problems are related.
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello, You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and -- version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide. Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO? Regards,Jirka On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote: > Hi there, > > When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, > "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand > side of anaconda GUI. > May I know what could cause this? >
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO?
rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
$ rpm -q --whatprovides system-release fedora-release-workstation-30-900.noarch $ rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release 900[
It seems to be correct. The liveinst script should set the environment variable ANACONDA_ISFINAL to True before Anaconda is started. Network installations use the IsFinal attribute of the .buildstamp file to determine the value of the flag, but Live ISO shouldn't have this file and should use ANACONDA_ISFINAL instead. The path to the .buildstamp file can be /.buildstamp, /tmp/product/.buildstamp or set by the environment variable PRODBUILDPATH. Could you check that these files do not exist on your ISO? Otherwise, I would recommend to report a bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ and attach the Anaconda logs from the installation.
Vendy
> both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see > given values. > both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO > build along with few 3rd party repos. > > Regards, > -- > Danishka Navin > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________Anaconda- > devel-list mailing listAnaconda-devel-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
_______________________________________________Anaconda-devel-list mailing listAnaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
As you are adding no Fedora content you must use different branding https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Secondary_Mark you are free to make your own release package and put content as you want to.
Dennis
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 05:25 Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Is it ok to modify /etc/os-release for re-branding purpose?
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 6:11 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:29 PM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 6:16 PM Vendula Poncova vponcova@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:56 AM Danishka Navin danishka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jirka,
I used the following command but did't use --product and --version at all. Btw, does livecd-creator read from /etc/os-release when we ignore both --product and --version?
livecd-creator --verbose --config=hanthana-live-workstation.ks --fslabel=h30 --cache=cache --tmpdir=tmp
Then I copied fresh kisktars shipped by fedora and rerun with my custom configs. I could not reproduce the issue.
I wonder if the issue caused by following entries in the /etc/os-release file.
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora" REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
Btw, there is a new issue occurred. As in this image, Anaconda keeps duplicating the values of redhat-release file. I am not sure if its a bug or I mage a mistake.
https://pasteboard.co/IvvT4nf.png
Added Hanthana Workstation (Vishwa)' in to the redhat-release file. https://pasteboard.co/IvvSiU5.png
If you have digital at the end, it only repeats the digit. When using "Hanthana 30" https://pasteboard.co/IvvTyBT.png
Anaconda reads the product name and the product version from /etc/system-release on Live ISO or from the .buildstamp file in network installations. See my comment about the .buildstamp file below. I think that all these problems are related.
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:06 PM jkonecny@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
You have probably used bad parameters when you were invoking lorax. You have to use correct --product and --version parameters otherwise we will be handling your ISO as Rawhide.
Could you please tell us what command did you used to create your ISO?
Regards, Jirka
On Sat, 2019-08-31 at 18:12 +0530, Danishka Navin wrote:
Hi there,
When I was trying to install f30 based remixed ISO, "PRE-RELEASE/TESTING" text appearing in top-right hand side of anaconda GUI. May I know what could cause this?
Hello,
for Live ISO, there is a little crazy logic that sets up the flag for a final release:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/data/liveinst/liveinst#L...
Basically, it is determined by a version of a package that provides system-release, so I would check that.
What is the output of these commands, when you run them on your ISO? rpm -q --whatprovides system-release rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release
$ rpm -q --whatprovides system-release fedora-release-workstation-30-900.noarch $ rpm -q --qf '%{Release}' --whatprovides system-release 900[
It seems to be correct. The liveinst script should set the environment variable ANACONDA_ISFINAL to True before Anaconda is started.
Network installations use the IsFinal attribute of the .buildstamp file to determine the value of the flag, but Live ISO shouldn't have this file and should use ANACONDA_ISFINAL instead. The path to the .buildstamp file can be /.buildstamp, /tmp/product/.buildstamp or set by the environment variable PRODBUILDPATH. Could you check that these files do not exist on your ISO?
Otherwise, I would recommend to report a bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ and attach the Anaconda logs from the installation.
Vendy
both os-release and redhat-release updated and I can see given values.
both fedora and fedora-update repos used during the ISO build along with few 3rd party repos.
Regards,
Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
-- Danishka Navin
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
anaconda-devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org