Re: [PATCH 5/6] osstest: introduce a script to build a FreeBSD package repository

From: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@citrix.com>
To: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] osstest: introduce a script to build a FreeBSD package repository
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 12:21:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <23783.54226.449841.704825@mariner.uk.xensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190524101343.2rerk7u5jf5shtsi@Air-de-Roger>

Roger Pau Monne writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/6] osstest: introduce a script to build a FreeBSD package repository"):
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:38:57AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I notice that none of your freebsd build jobs pass any share- hostflag
> > so they always use a fresh installation.  Is that necessary ?
> 
> Hm, I don't think so. build-amd64-xen-freebsd and
> build-amd64-freebsd-again could share a host. I need to take a look at
> how to do this, I could send this as a separate fix for the existing
> jobs.

Sure.  It's achieved by putting share-SOMETHING in (any of) the
hostflags runvars.  SOMETHING needs to include the value of every
setting which makes a difference, except the osstest revision (which
is added implictly).  Jobs with identical SOMETHING can share.

> > > +# Consumes the following input runvars:
> > > +# svnrevision_freebsdports: ports svn revision id to use.
> > > +# svntree_freebsdports ports svn tree to fetch the source code from.
> > 
> > More regular in osstest terms would be
> >   tree_freebsdports
> >   revision_freebsdports
> >   treevcs_freebsdports=svn
> > But I guess svn is sufficiently unlike what osstest expects out of a
> > vcs that this is not feasible, and it is better to do it this way.
> 
> I don't really have an opinion, I somehow assumed that using the same
> format might interfere with things like bisection, so I've decided to
> pass the git revision using tree_freebsdports &c and the svn revision
> using the newly introduced flags.

Well, svn is awkward to cache and to use and probably we couldn't get
the bisector to work with it, indeed.  So err I guess I'm saying leave
it as it is.

> > > +sub create_jail() {
> > > +    my $src_prefix = $r{"freebsd_distpath"} ||
> > > +                     get_stashed("path_freebsddist", $r{"freebsdbuildjob"});
> > > +    my $dst_prefix = "/root/sets";
> > 
> > Do we need a jail for this ?  We have a whole baremetal OS install
> > whose entire purpose is to do this build ...
> 
> Yes, that's how the repository package builder (poudriere) works, it
> requires a jail to do the package building. In our case it's not so
> important, but I assume this is mostly done to always use a clean
> install, so that currently installed packages on the system don't
> interfere with package building.

Fair enough.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel