fix: Remove partition table from disk removed from a VG

[vojtechtrefny]

When removing a PV from a VG we currently remove only the PV partition and not the partition table on the disk. This fixes this by removing the partition table too.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 10.73%. Comparing base (bb51979) to head (6f6f115).
Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
library/blivet.py	0.00%	15 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (bb51979) and HEAD (6f6f115). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (bb51979)	HEAD (6f6f115)
sanity	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #464      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   16.54%   10.73%   -5.81%     
==========================================
  Files           2        8       +6     
  Lines         284     1946    +1662     
  Branches       79        0      -79     
==========================================
+ Hits           47      209     +162     
- Misses        237     1737    +1500     

Flag	Coverage Δ
sanity	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[richm]

@vojtechtrefny looks good - did something change in el10? Because if I look at the output of wipefs -n at the end of tests_lvm_pool_members.yml with el9, the partition table is removed, even without this change

[richm]

@vojtechtrefny looks good - did something change in el10? Because if I look at the output of wipefs -n at the end of tests_lvm_pool_members.yml with el9, the partition table is removed, even without this change

Sorry, I'm wrong - on centos-9 there is a partition table, but it is different.

DEVICE OFFSET TYPE UUID LABEL
sda    0x1fe  dos

[spetrosi]

[citest]

[richm]

@spetrosi https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/linuxsystemroles/logs/tf_storage-464_CentOS-Stream-10-2.17_20240801-082216/artifacts - I don't see any failures, but the github action result is failed?

[richm]

@spetrosi https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/linuxsystemroles/logs/tf_storage-464_CentOS-Stream-10-2.17_20240801-082216/artifacts - I don't see any failures, but the github action result is failed?

not all of the tests ran - did the test run get killed by some sort of timeout? One problem with the storage tests is that they take hours to complete - may need to increase resources/timeout - maybe testing farm is killing the test because it takes too long.