From: Agostino Sarubbo <ago@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Disturbing state of arch testing in Gentoo
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2022 19:50:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3218817.44csPzL39Z@spectre> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2bd8402513dd47b06aa38a0d49e1c29880c1aad4.camel@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2086 bytes --]
On domenica 6 novembre 2022 09:15:40 CET Michał Górny wrote:
> On top of that, it seems that most of it still relies on proprietary
> software and we have no clue how *exactly* it works, and it's really,
> really hard to get a straight answer.
I'm speaking for myself. I still use getatoms.py to fetch 'doable' stablereqs (it is on my todo
to switch to nattka). And I have a script the *simply* does emerge over the list of the
packages.
There is nothing obscure in it.
> So, my questions are:
>
> 1. Is "runtime testing required" field being respected? Obviously not
> every package can be (sufficiently) tested via FEATURES=test, so we've
> added that fields. However, if arch testers just ignore it and push
> things stable based on pure build testing...
sam already provided the right answer. In addition, when we introduced runtime_testing
and package_list fields we requested support in pybugz:
https://github.com/williamh/pybugz/issues/105[1]
There is no trace (into the github ticket) about runtime testing field because I discussed/
requested over irc.
> 2. How are kernels being tested? Given the speed with which new gentoo-
> sources stablereqs are handled, I really feel like "arch testing" there
> means "checking if sources install", and have little to do with working
> kernels.
For amd64, I boot into the new kernel to verify that at least it boots. For other 'exotic'
arches, since there is a lack of hardware, the rule was to verify that at least it builds (install
if we want to use the right word).
If you think that build only is not appropriate, I can skip kernel stablereqs.
> 3. How does the automation handle packages that aren't trivially
> installable? I recall that in the past stablereqs were stalled for
> months without a single comment because automation couldn't figure out
> how to proceed, and nobody bothered reporting a problem.
I skip them from automation and from time to time I handle it manually.
Agostino
--------
[1] https://github.com/williamh/pybugz/issues/105
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4276 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-06 18:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-06 8:15 [gentoo-dev] Disturbing state of arch testing in Gentoo Michał Górny
2022-11-06 8:34 ` Sam James
2022-11-08 4:58 ` Arthur Zamarin
2022-11-06 10:37 ` Piotr Karbowski
2022-11-07 6:07 ` Oskari Pirhonen
2022-11-07 6:26 ` Joonas Niilola
2022-11-07 15:13 ` John Helmert III
2022-11-08 7:40 ` Oskari Pirhonen
2022-11-07 23:16 ` Sam James
2022-11-08 0:23 ` Rich Freeman
2022-11-08 0:30 ` Sam James
2022-11-08 0:34 ` John Helmert III
2022-11-08 0:54 ` Rich Freeman
2022-11-08 6:06 ` Joonas Niilola
2022-11-08 13:26 ` Michał Górny
2022-11-08 13:55 ` Agostino Sarubbo
2022-11-06 13:27 ` John Helmert III
2022-11-06 19:03 ` Agostino Sarubbo
2022-11-06 19:15 ` John Helmert III
2022-11-06 18:50 ` Agostino Sarubbo [this message]
2022-11-08 8:43 ` Agostino Sarubbo
2022-11-08 15:18 ` John Helmert III
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3218817.44csPzL39Z@spectre \
--to=ago@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=mgorny@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox