Re: [gentoo-alt] Re: 'Continuous Integration' for Gentoo Prefix?

[M. J. Everitt]

I propose project lead (or member) files a bug to infra for new list,
similar to bug 581370 .. (proxy-maint@)

:]

MJE

On 16/01/19 18:33, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> On 1/16/19 2:59 PM, Sam Pfeiffer wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Given it's the first time I touch Fedora it took a bit of time to get it working (also I had some DNS issues where I couldn't use dnf).
>>
>> But it's done.
> Wow, great job!
>
>> You can check out the jobs at:
>>
>> For amd64 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile <https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora> of the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=451> For x86 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile <https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci_32b/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora> of the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=450
>>
>> In 5-6h they should be finished.
>>
>> In general all the builds are here: https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build?definitionId=2&_a=summary
>>
>> Given this seems to be running quite nicely. Should I add automated emails when builds fail?
>> I can do it either adding a script that does it or via the CI interface (I think).
>> I won't always be able to check it out quick and make a bug report, so maybe someone else would like to receive the emails about the failures.
> It does make sense to have more than a single person be notified about build results,
> at least on failures - but I do have no strong meaning about the tooling here.
>
> And yes, I do have build jobs here as well that will never ever fit into some free cloud,
> but their results would do.
>
> Thanks!
> /haubi/
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:28 PM Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o <mailto:haubi@g.o>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 1/16/19 2:23 AM, Sam Pfeiffer wrote:
>>     > Hello Michael,
>>     >
>>     > Yeah, just tell me which base distro do you want and I'll add a nightly job with that one. I just need to find a Docker image for it.
>>
>>     It doesn't really matter, just not Ubuntu (or anything else that does 'multiarch').
>>     I would suggest Fedora though...
>>
>>     >
>>     > Will the final Gentoo Prefix, once bootstrapped, be any different from the current one I'm bootstrapping?
>>
>>     Yes: It does not contain sys-libs/glibc and sys-kernel/linux-headers.
>>
>>     > (To know if I should also publish automated releases of the bootstrapped Gentoo Prefix).
>>
>>     Haven't recognized that you do 'publish automated releases', nice!
>>
>>     As Prefix/Guest is stronger bound to the host OS compared to Prefix/RAP,
>>     binary releases don't feel that useful here - at least to myself.
>>
>>     Instead, besides x86_64, also x86 (32bit) would be nice - simply using 'linux32':
>>     $ PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes linux32 ./bootstrap-prefix.sh /target/prefix noninteractive
>>
>>     Thanks a lot!
>>     /haubi/
>>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 04:38 Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o <mailto:haubi@g.o> <mailto:haubi@g.o <mailto:haubi@g.o>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >     Hi Sammy,
>>     >
>>     >     because of Ubuntu inside these build slaves I do understand you currently
>>     >     perform Prefix RAP bootstraps only - as this is the default anyway.
>>     >
>>     >     Do you see a chance to perform Prefix Guest bootstraps as well,
>>     >     even if that would require something other distro than Ubuntu?
>>     >
>>     >     Otherwise, the only difference is to set the PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes
>>     >     environment variable when executing bootstrap-prefix.sh.
>>     >
>>     >     Thanks!
>>     >     /haubi/
>>     >
>>     >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *
>> *
>> *Sammy Pfeiffer*
>> PhD Candidate at The Magic Lab within UTS.
>