On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 14:37 -0300, Cleber Rosa wrote: > On 05/23/2012 02:22 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 14:06 -0300, Cleber Rosa wrote: > >> On 05/17/2012 09:41 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > >>> On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 17:01 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > >>>> On 17.05.2012 [20:56:40 -0300], Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 16:44 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Lucas, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> client job reports: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:13 WARNI| boottool:0567| version 8.3 being used is not > >>>>>> guaranteed to work properly. Mininum required version is 8.11. > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:13 INFO | boottool:0503| Installing grubby because > >>>>>> currently installed version (8.3) is not recent enough > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 DEBUG| boottool:1251| Failed to build grubby during > >>>>>> "make" step > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 DEBUG| boottool:1239| grubby.c:28:18: fatal error: > >>>>>> popt.h: No such file or directory > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 DEBUG| boottool:1239| compilation terminated. > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 DEBUG| boottool:1239| make: *** [grubby.o] Error 1 > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 ERROR| job:1330| JOB ERROR: Unable to instantiate > >>>>>> boottool > >>>>>> 05/17 19:36:15 INFO | job:0210| END ABORT ---- ---- > >>>>>> timestamp=1337297775 localtime=May 17 19:36:15 Unable to > >>>>>> instantiate boottool > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Seems like maybe I'm missing popt-devel? But I don't think the autotest > >>>>> Yes, popt-devel is required to build grubby. > >>>>> > >>>>>> harness should require me to change my kickstarts (although I am happy > >>>>>> to do so) to add that package. Is it possible to, from w/in autotest, > >>>>>> automatically install that package as a dependency? > >>>>> We still don't have this support. We wrote a tool to act as an > >>>>> abstraction layer for package managers: > >>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/autotest/autotest/blob/master/client/shared/software_manager.py > >>>>> > >>>>> That code could make possible what you describe, however I never got > >>>>> around using it inside autotest (yet another pending task) > >>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/autotest/autotest/issues/350 > >>>>> > >>>>> So, for now, it's advisable to add popt-devel to the kickstarts you > >>>>> have. > >>>>> > >>>>> Sorry about the inconvenience :( > >>>> No problem, adding it now. Could we perhaps check to see if it's > >>>> installed in the "installing grubby" check and not bother building if we > >>>> can't find it? > >>> Fair enough. I've just sent a patch that does this. I'd need to test > >>> before applying it, but in any case, we're on a good track. > >> libblkid-devel and libuuid-devel are also build deps. > >> > >> The question is how deep should we go looking and checking those deps? > >> make, gcc, glibc-devel, etc also come to my mind. > > Sure, I understand what you meant, fair enough. If you feel inclined, > > please send a patch reverting the change: > > What I really meant was to call for some kind of decision on that, which > I myself could not reach alone :) > > Also, I anticipated that even after having that patch applied, our users > would get yet another failure, after all, popt.h ought to be more > commonly installed than stuff such as libblkid and libuuid headers. > > The use of software manager does indeed looks like a nice solution for > autotest, but not so much for boottool as an standalone tool (which > still holds true when running server code). > > So, I don't think we should revert your patch, quite the contrary. Until > we have a better solution, I think we should add checks for these other > key header files.
Ok, so one of us (lmr/cleber/nacc) should change a patch adding checks for the other headers (libblkid and libuuid) and then call it a day :) _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list Autotest@test.kernel.org http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
