Gentoo Archives: gentoo-alt

From: Sam Pfeiffer <sammypfeiffer@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-alt] Re: 'Continuous Integration' for Gentoo Prefix?
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 13:59:25
Message-Id: CABVqfw8uOwBWo6ZO42D8OofGj95iXLZtKok0RQ=gby4F00kwig@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-alt] Re: 'Continuous Integration' for Gentoo Prefix? by Michael Haubenwallner
1 Hello,
2
3 Given it's the first time I touch Fedora it took a bit of time to get it
4 working (also I had some DNS issues where I couldn't use dnf).
5
6 But it's done.
7
8 You can check out the jobs at:
9
10 For amd64 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile
11 <https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora>
12 of
13 the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=451
14 For x86 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile
15 <https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci_32b/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora>
16 of
17 the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=450
18
19 In 5-6h they should be finished.
20
21 In general all the builds are here:
22 https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build?definitionId=2&_a=summary
23
24 Given this seems to be running quite nicely. Should I add automated emails
25 when builds fail?
26 I can do it either adding a script that does it or via the CI interface (I
27 think). I won't always be able to check it out quick and make a bug report,
28 so maybe someone else would like to receive the emails about the failures.
29
30
31
32 On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:28 PM Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o>
33 wrote:
34
35 > On 1/16/19 2:23 AM, Sam Pfeiffer wrote:
36 > > Hello Michael,
37 > >
38 > > Yeah, just tell me which base distro do you want and I'll add a nightly
39 > job with that one. I just need to find a Docker image for it.
40 >
41 > It doesn't really matter, just not Ubuntu (or anything else that does
42 > 'multiarch').
43 > I would suggest Fedora though...
44 >
45 > >
46 > > Will the final Gentoo Prefix, once bootstrapped, be any different from
47 > the current one I'm bootstrapping?
48 >
49 > Yes: It does not contain sys-libs/glibc and sys-kernel/linux-headers.
50 >
51 > > (To know if I should also publish automated releases of the bootstrapped
52 > Gentoo Prefix).
53 >
54 > Haven't recognized that you do 'publish automated releases', nice!
55 >
56 > As Prefix/Guest is stronger bound to the host OS compared to Prefix/RAP,
57 > binary releases don't feel that useful here - at least to myself.
58 >
59 > Instead, besides x86_64, also x86 (32bit) would be nice - simply using
60 > 'linux32':
61 > $ PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes linux32 ./bootstrap-prefix.sh /target/prefix
62 > noninteractive
63 >
64 > Thanks a lot!
65 > /haubi/
66 >
67 > >
68 > >
69 > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 04:38 Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o
70 > <mailto:haubi@g.o> wrote:
71 > >
72 > > Hi Sammy,
73 > >
74 > > because of Ubuntu inside these build slaves I do understand you
75 > currently
76 > > perform Prefix RAP bootstraps only - as this is the default anyway.
77 > >
78 > > Do you see a chance to perform Prefix Guest bootstraps as well,
79 > > even if that would require something other distro than Ubuntu?
80 > >
81 > > Otherwise, the only difference is to set the PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes
82 > > environment variable when executing bootstrap-prefix.sh.
83 > >
84 > > Thanks!
85 > > /haubi/
86 > >
87 > >
88 >
89 >
90 >
91
92 --
93
94 *Sammy Pfeiffer*
95 PhD Candidate at The Magic Lab within UTS.

Replies