5:09 a.m.
Debian sid is currently broken on mips64el and s390x, so use
Debian 10 for those specific builds and move other architectures
(armv7l and ppc64le) from Debian 10 to Debian sid to maintain
the rough 1:1 split.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna(a)redhat.com>
---
Test pipeline: https://gitlab.com/abologna/libvirt/-/pipelines/355069168
Still running, but all Debian builds have already completed
successfully.
Changes from [v1]:
* also swap s390x and ppc64le.
[v1] https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2021-August/msg00515.html
.gitlab-ci.yml | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
index d1609c260d..a7197b557c 100644
--- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
+++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ armv6l-debian-10-container:
NAME: debian-10-cross-armv6l
armv7l-debian-10-container:
- extends: .container_job
+ extends: .container_optional_job
variables:
NAME: debian-10-cross-armv7l
@@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ mips-debian-10-container:
NAME: debian-10-cross-mips
mips64el-debian-10-container:
- extends: .container_optional_job
+ extends: .container_job
variables:
NAME: debian-10-cross-mips64el
@@ -250,12 +250,12 @@ mipsel-debian-10-container:
NAME: debian-10-cross-mipsel
ppc64le-debian-10-container:
- extends: .container_job
+ extends: .container_optional_job
variables:
NAME: debian-10-cross-ppc64le
s390x-debian-10-container:
- extends: .container_optional_job
+ extends: .container_job
variables:
NAME: debian-10-cross-s390x
@@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ armv6l-debian-sid-container:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-armv6l
armv7l-debian-sid-container:
- extends: .container_optional_job
+ extends: .container_job
variables:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-armv7l
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ i686-debian-sid-container:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-i686
mips64el-debian-sid-container:
- extends: .container_job
+ extends: .container_optional_job
variables:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-mips64el
@@ -290,12 +290,12 @@ mipsel-debian-sid-container:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-mipsel
ppc64le-debian-sid-container:
- extends: .container_optional_job
+ extends: .container_job
variables:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-ppc64le
s390x-debian-sid-container:
- extends: .container_job
+ extends: .container_optional_job
variables:
NAME: debian-sid-cross-s390x
@@ -473,12 +473,12 @@ armv6l-debian-10:
NAME: debian-10
CROSS: armv6l
-armv7l-debian-10:
+armv7l-debian-sid:
extends: .cross_build_job
needs:
- - armv7l-debian-10-container
+ - armv7l-debian-sid-container
variables:
- NAME: debian-10
+ NAME: debian-sid
CROSS: armv7l
i686-debian-sid:
@@ -497,12 +497,12 @@ mips-debian-10:
NAME: debian-10
CROSS: mips
-mips64el-debian-sid:
+mips64el-debian-10:
extends: .cross_build_job
needs:
- - mips64el-debian-sid-container
+ - mips64el-debian-10-container
variables:
- NAME: debian-sid
+ NAME: debian-10
CROSS: mips64el
mipsel-debian-10:
@@ -513,20 +513,20 @@ mipsel-debian-10:
NAME: debian-10
CROSS: mipsel
-ppc64le-debian-10:
+ppc64le-debian-sid:
extends: .cross_build_job
needs:
- - ppc64le-debian-10-container
+ - ppc64le-debian-sid-container
variables:
- NAME: debian-10
+ NAME: debian-sid
CROSS: ppc64le
-s390x-debian-sid:
+s390x-debian-10:
extends: .cross_build_job
needs:
- - s390x-debian-sid-container
+ - s390x-debian-10-container
variables:
- NAME: debian-sid
+ NAME: debian-10
CROSS: s390x
mingw32-fedora-rawhide:
--
2.31.1
6:42 a.m.
On a Wednesday in 2021, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
Debian sid is currently broken on mips64el and s390x, so use
Debian 10 for those specific builds and move other architectures
(armv7l and ppc64le) from Debian 10 to Debian sid to maintain
the rough 1:1 split.
This still marks sid-based containers as mandatory, so any improvement
is only temporary
Jano
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna(a)redhat.com>
---
Test pipeline: https://gitlab.com/abologna/libvirt/-/pipelines/355069168
Still running, but all Debian builds have already completed
successfully.
Changes from [v1]:
* also swap s390x and ppc64le.
[v1] https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2021-August/msg00515.html
.gitlab-ci.yml | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
8 a.m.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 01:42:28PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
On a Wednesday in 2021, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> Debian sid is currently broken on mips64el and s390x, so use
> Debian 10 for those specific builds and move other architectures
> (armv7l and ppc64le) from Debian 10 to Debian sid to maintain
> the rough 1:1 split.
This still marks sid-based containers as mandatory, so any improvement
is only temporary
sid, just like Rawhide and Tumbleweed, will break from time to time.
This is something that's simply inevitable because they're such fast
moving targets. The upside is that we also get to catch actual
failures ahead of time. If the price to pay is that we have to
shuffle a couple of jobs around once every few months (last time was
in February, and the previous one was last June) I'd say the benefit
greatly outweighs the cost.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
8:58 a.m.
On a Wednesday in 2021, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 01:42:28PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On a Wednesday in 2021, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > Debian sid is currently broken on mips64el and s390x, so use
> > Debian 10 for those specific builds and move other architectures
> > (armv7l and ppc64le) from Debian 10 to Debian sid to maintain
> > the rough 1:1 split.
>
> This still marks sid-based containers as mandatory, so any improvement
> is only temporary
sid, just like Rawhide and Tumbleweed, will break from time to time.
This is something that's simply inevitable because they're such fast
moving targets.
Yes, and we accept that. As of
commit 42f3ec750027ee55c8f98a487cc0f183dd9b429d
rawhide container builds are optional.
It might not be a good first impression for people who freshly cloned
the repo, but neither is them not getting FreeBSD coverage.
The upside is that we also get to catch actual
failures ahead of time. If the price to pay is that we have to
shuffle a couple of jobs around once every few months (last time was
in February, and the previous one was last June) I'd say the benefit
greatly outweighs the cost.
The cost is also decreased signal-to-noise ratio, which reduces
the contributors' faith in CI and makes it more likely for actual
bugs to slip in.
Also, to me, not all jobs are equally important.
Knowing whether the build passed for mingw and there are no unused
variables left for clang to find is more important than yet another
cross build for Linux.
But if you're willing to reroll the dice in a few months time and make
yet another version of this patch:
Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko(a)redhat.com>
</thread>
Jano
1192
days inactive
1192
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Andrea Bolognani -
Ján Tomko