V Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 06:04:25PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > CI for Bodhi updates has a bunch of tests like > fedora-ci.koji-build.tier0.functional > fedora-ci.koji-build./plans/public.functional > that routinely fail. In fact, they are designed in a way where they > _must_ fail for many important packages: systemd, fedora-release, > coreutils, and anything else which has conflicting subpackages. > (Example: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-3aafcac6a8) > > This is particularly annoying for multi-package updates, because the > test will fail if _any_ of the packages are like this. > > Package installability is the most basic test. This should never > fail. Can we please make this not fail? > Yes. Installability is a very basic test and it should be reliable. My feeling is that broken dependencies are the most common packaging bug.
> Or if it's not possible to make them work, disable them? In the > current state we just waste everybody's time and teach packagers to > ignore CI results. > As far as I know, installability tests are not required to pass gating by default. I think the problem is that the tests are run even if nobody asks for them. > one of them (60-Install-packages.txt) shows: > Failed to resolve the transaction: > Problem 1: package coreutils-9.5-4.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline conflicts > with coreutils-single > provided by coreutils-single-9.5-4.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline > - conflicting requests I guess the test does not take RPM Conflicts into account. It's overly optimistic when populating a system by installing all tested packages together instead of creating a new system for each test seperately. Or by adding --allowerasing to "dnf install" invocations if the CI wants to reuse the system. > A third problem is that the output is full of things that _look_ like > errors: > > Warning: Permanently added '3.14.151.22' (ED25519) to the list of known > hosts. > > egrep: warning: egrep is obsolescent; using grep -E > > <string>:36: (WARNING/2) Bullet list ends without a blank line; unexpected > unindent. > > <string>:9: (WARNING/2) Definition list ends without a blank line; > unexpected unindent. > > This makes those jobs look semi-abandonded. It also makes it hard to > look for the real error, because one has to consider each of those > lines and answer the question "is this the error I'm looking for?". Yes, I've opened many issues regarding Fedora CI. I think the problem is that the CI maintainer is not a regular packager and thus does not observe CI reults in real life. On the other hand, package maintainers do not have accces to the CI system and need to rely on the CI people. Or a CI person?!. The head count is probably another problem. -- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
