Hello fellow Ubuntu developers,

those of you who touch packages with autopkgtests probably got a lot
of "Jenkins failed/fixed" spam recently, often due to bugs and
problesm with the infrastructure. Apologies for that! Now all known
cases of that should be fixed, except for the timeouts on large source
packages (chromium-browser, eglibc, libreoffice, linux); these are
high on my list, and we have some initial handle on that.

For anything else, the failures on
https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Utopic/view/AutoPkgTest/ should now
mostly be "real". A lot of them already failed in trusty, but there
are some new ones as the system became stricter: We now dropped using
the lp:auto-package-testing scripts and use adt-run directly, with the
relatively new adt-virt-qemu backend:

 * This uses smaller VMs, i. e.  many previously pre-installed
   dependencies are not available any more and need explicit test
   dependencies.

 * This runs a fresh VM for each build and test, so dependencies from
   previous builds/tests are not available any more and need to become
   explicit test dependencies. (I'd like to point out the @builddeps@
   pseudo-dependency in case your test runs make/gcc to build tests
   from your tree).

 * Due to the former we can now also run "Restrictions:
   breaks-testbed" tests, which wasn't possible before.

I updated the packaging guide accordingly, so please have a look how
to reproduce the test bed and test runs like CI does it:

  http://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/auto-pkg-test.html

Now you can use much simpler/faster schroots or LXC as well, unless
your tests needs more isolation; see
/usr/share/doc/autopkgtest/README.running-tests.gz for details.

Thanks,

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

-- 
ubuntu-devel-announce mailing list
ubuntu-devel-announce@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-announce

Reply via email to