On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 19:33:49 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <sh...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Current GHA runs produce lots of warnings:
>> 
>> Node.js 16 actions are deprecated. Please update the following actions to 
>> use Node.js 20: actions/cache@v3, actions/download-artifact@v3, 
>> actions/upload-artifact@v3. For more information see: 
>> https://github.blog/changelog/2023-09-22-github-actions-transitioning-from-node-16-to-node-20/.
>> 
>> We can upgrade to new actions to get the Node20.
>> 
>> Release/migration notes:
>> https://github.com/actions/cache#whats-new
>> https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact/blob/main/docs/MIGRATION.md
>> https://github.com/actions/download-artifact/blob/main/docs/MIGRATION.md
>> https://github.com/actions/github-script#breaking-changes
>> 
>> There is also msys2/setup-msys2, which was pinned by 
>> [JDK-8310259](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8310259). We need at least 
>> 2.21.0 to get Node 20:
>> https://github.com/msys2/setup-msys2/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md. I think we can 
>> unpin msys2 at this point.
>> 
>> I don't think any of the migration problems outlined in those notes apply to 
>> our workflows.
>> 
>> Additional testing:
>>  - [x] 3x GHA with cleaned caches
>>  - [x]  3x GHA with populated caches (default)
>
> Aleksey Shipilev has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Also update github-script

> [We pinned it](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8310259) because there 
> were weird failures in jtreg builds on Windows due to msys2 bug. This is why 
> I tested GHA multiple times, every time clearing the caches to trigger jtreg 
> rebuild. msys2 had fixed lots of possibly related path conversion bugs 
> recently, but it is really hard to pin-point what went into latest release. 
> Example of msys2 fix: 
> [msys2/MSYS2-packages#4200](https://github.com/msys2/MSYS2-packages/pull/4200)
>  -- done in Nov 2023, so the current release hopefully has all these.

Ah-ha! Here we go. This PR proposes updating to `v2.22.0` (Update base 
distribution to 20240113). So the easy test for the hypothesis that November 
fixes got there is trying with `v2.21.0` (Update base distribution to 
20231026). Tried it right now, and Windows jtreg build [immediately 
failed](https://github.com/shipilev/jdk/actions/runs/7694685053/job/20965966992):


/bin/cp 
/d/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/deps/jtharness/build/binaries/lib/javatest.jar 
D:/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/images/jtreg/lib/javatest.jar
CLASSPATH="D:/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/classes;D:/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/deps/jtharness/build/binaries/lib/javatest.jar;"
 \
    C:/hostedtoolcache/windows/Java_Temurin-Hotspot_jdk/17.0.10-7/x64/bin/javac 
--release 11 -Xlint:all,-options,-deprecation -Werror \
        -d D:/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/classes \
        -encoding ASCII \
        ../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/Diff.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/DiffReader.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/Fault.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/Help.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/HTMLReporter.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/HTMLWriter.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/Main.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/MultiMap.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/Reporter.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/ReportReader.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/SimpleReporter.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/StandardDiff.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/StatusComparator.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/SuperDiff.java 
../src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/diff/WorkDirectoryReader.java
/bin/sh: line 1: 
C:/hostedtoolcache/windows/Java_Temurin-Hotspot_jdk/17.0.10-7/x64/bin/javac: 
Bad address
make: *** [jtdiff.gmk:36: 
D:/a/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/build/classes.com.sun.javatest.diff.ok] Error 126


This gives me even more confidence in msys2 unpinning :)

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17572#issuecomment-1914418168

Reply via email to