Add a boot iso comparison script

[M4rtinK]

The script is mainly based on comparing the /root/lorax-packages.log files embedded in boot.iso images and provides information about package differences between two boot.iso images.

As long as the unsquashfs tool is available it is possible to compare images without sudo. If the tool is not available an alternative method requiring sudo is used.

The tool can also output machine readable data in JSON format.

Assisted-by: Cursor

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @M4rtinK, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a new Python utility designed to streamline the comparison of Fedora boot ISO images. Its primary function is to identify discrepancies in the installed software packages by analyzing the lorax-packages.log files embedded within the ISOs. This tool provides valuable insights into how package sets evolve between different ISO builds, offering both human-readable reports and machine-parseable JSON output.

Highlights

• New ISO Comparison Script: A new Python script, compare_iso, has been added to facilitate the comparison of two Fedora ISO images.
• Lorax Package Log Analysis: The script focuses on analyzing the /root/lorax-packages.log files embedded within the install.img SquashFS filesystem of each ISO to identify package differences.
• Flexible Extraction: It supports two methods for extracting SquashFS contents: using unsquashfs (preferable, no sudo required) or falling back to a sudo mount method if unsquashfs is unavailable.
• Detailed Comparison Output: The tool generates a comprehensive report highlighting packages unique to each ISO and those with version or architecture changes.
• Machine-Readable Output: An option is provided to output the comparison results in a structured JSON format, enabling programmatic consumption.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new Python script, compare_iso, for comparing package contents of two Fedora ISO images. The script is well-structured, using a class to encapsulate the comparison logic and a context manager for resource cleanup. It robustly handles dependencies on external tools by providing fallbacks. My review focuses on improving robustness, correctness, and adherence to best practices. I've identified several high-severity bugs related to error handling and package name parsing, and medium-severity issues concerning unused imports and logging practices. The provided suggestions aim to fix these issues and make the script more reliable and maintainable.

[KKoukiou]

I like the idea of having such a script, but it would need at least one test, for commiting this to the repo.

[M4rtinK]

I like the idea of having such a script, but it would need at least one test, for commiting this to the repo.

Sure, lets do that - I think I would skip comparing actual images as that would require downloading 1+GB of stuff for every invocation,, but I can do some less resource intesive testing for now, like checking it correctly handles edge cases (no imag provided, 2 empty files, etc.). :)

[github-actions]

This PR is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity.
Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 30 days.