You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Kay Schenk@apache.org" <ks...@apache.org> on 2016/08/23 19:19:46 UTC
Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
FYI: communication with pono from infra
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:31:45 -0700
From: Kay Schenk@apache.org <ks...@apache.org>
Reply-To: kschenk@apache.org
To: Pono Takamori <po...@apache.org>
CC: infrastructure@apache.org Infrastructure
<in...@apache.org>, kay.schenk@gmail.com
On 08/23/2016 08:52 AM, Pono Takamori wrote:
> Q1: Are you talking about during a job or as a one time action? I can
> get lists of currently installed packages on the linux nodes fairly
> easily, the windows one will be a bit trickier unless you want to know
> specific versions of your dependencies.
I'd be happy with a one time action currently. Yeah, Windows is tricky.
>
> Q2: We can add those 2 jars to the build nodes. maven 2 should be
> installed on those boxes, did you need a specific version of it?
OK, I think whatever is out there now is fine for Maven. So, just
installing these jars is /usr/share/java should do the trick.
and, hmmm...we recommend ant 1.9 or later yet it seems what's on the
Linux32 buildbot is ant 1.8.2 and on Linux-64 it's ant 1.7.1. Time to
re-edit our configure.ac -- again.
So, if you could bump the ant version to 1.9.2 on all these that would
be great. More than 1.9.2 we have problems from my recollection.
>
> In regards to puppet, all three of the build nodes that you mentioned
> are not in puppet since tethys is running Ubuntu 10.04, bb-vm2 is
> running 12.04 and we do not have any puppet written for windows yet.
OK, I actually didn't notice that these Linux bots were on different
Ubuntu versions--gee!
> We could move the builds to a node with 14.04 so that adding
> dependencies would be you forking the listed repo and then adding the
> required dependencies
> here: https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/ubuntu/1404.yaml#L316
hmmm...let me confer with others and I'll get back to you on this. Can
you get me a pack list for 14.04 as well?
>
> Let me know if you have any other questions,
> -Pono
Not right now. Thank you SO much for helping with this. Let's keep in touch!
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Kay Schenk@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org> <kschenk@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hello Infra--
> Apache OpenOffice uses the following buildbots:
> Linux32 : bb-vm2_ubuntu_32bit
> Linux64: tethys_ubuntu
> Windows 7: bb-win7
>
> Q1: Short of writing a command line entry into our buildbot
> scripts, is
> there any way to get a listing of what packs are installed on
> these systems?
>
> Q2: We need the following packs installed on all three of these for
> automated testing:
> junit-4.12.jar
> hamcrest-core-1.3.jar
>
> Maybe maven2 also? But I just ran the tests I needed with "ant"
> which is
> part of our build requirements.
>
> Through private message, I was sent a link to:
> https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/tree/deployment/modules/build_slaves
> <https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/tree/deployment/modules/build_slaves>
>
> as a way of explanation to self-servicing the buildbots, but, not
> being
> a puppet guru, I am lost looking at this. Can you describe a basic
> procedure for me? What type of karma does anyone need? And to what?
> What's required to upload a new template? Instructions on what
> should be
> in the template. How do we initiate pull requests based on the
> templates, etc?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------
Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice
"Things work out best for those who make
the best of the way things work out."
-- John Wooden
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 08/28/2016 10:52 AM, Don Lewis wrote:
> > On 28 Aug, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 08/27/2016 06:22 PM, Gav wrote:
> >>> Hi.
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Don,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for
> >>>> use
> >>>>>> fwiw
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
> >>>>>>> I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages
> provide,
> >>>>>>> if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions
> from.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar
> file.
> >>>>>> I think this is it:
> >>>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
> >>>>>> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
> >>>>> download it during a build ?
> >>>>
> >>>> That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
> >>>> question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it
> as
> >>>> it is a compiled artifact.
> >>>>
> >>>> Based on this old bug report:
> >>>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you
> might
> >>>> want to investigate whether the junit package actually include
> hamcrest
> >>>> as well.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I expanded the install /usr/share/java/junit4.jar and saw no evidence
> of
> >>> hamcrest - and
> >>> the bug you reference is still open, so not fixed I guess :/
> >>>
> >>> I found where it is being actively developed (junit4 and junit5) on
> GitHub.
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/blob/master/pom.xml
> >>>
> >>> Shows that it pulls in hamcrest as a dependency - does that mean it
> makes
> >>> it available
> >>> for use ? I don't know.
> >>
> >> First of all, thank you for all this work, Gav!
> >>
> >> If you've got information on the complete pack for Junit4 (4.11), can
> >> you see if ANY hamcrest jar is included? I personally just manually
> >> downloaded hamcrest-core-1.3.jar, put into /usr/share/java and made a
> >> sym link called just hamcrest.jar to it.
> >
> > I don't have a Ubuntu 14 VM handy, but I just got my Ubuntu 16 VM
> > working again. Junit doesn't install hamcrest, and python-hamcrest
> > doesn't either. The package that does install hamcrest-all.jar is
> > libhamcrest-java.
> >
>
> Thanks for checking on all this, Don, and you are absolutely correct!
> Gav, it seems what we should install on the new 14.04 systems is this:
>
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/libhamcrest1.2-java
Great, that works.
>
> This should work with the default junit 4.11. We do not want or need the
> hamcrest-python.
>
> Unless something's changed significantly in the junit tests (and I have
> not researched this), this should work for us. We used junit 4.11 for
> testing on AOO 4.1.1.
>
ack, default junit4 on 14.04 LTS Ubuntu is 4.11 so all good there.
Thanks.
--
Gav...
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org>.
On 08/28/2016 10:52 AM, Don Lewis wrote:
> On 28 Aug, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/2016 06:22 PM, Gav wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Don,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>>>>>> junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for
>>>> use
>>>>>> fwiw
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
>>>>>>> I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
>>>>>>> if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
>>>>>> I think this is it:
>>>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
>>>>>> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
>>>>> download it during a build ?
>>>>
>>>> That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
>>>> question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it as
>>>> it is a compiled artifact.
>>>>
>>>> Based on this old bug report:
>>>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you might
>>>> want to investigate whether the junit package actually include hamcrest
>>>> as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I expanded the install /usr/share/java/junit4.jar and saw no evidence of
>>> hamcrest - and
>>> the bug you reference is still open, so not fixed I guess :/
>>>
>>> I found where it is being actively developed (junit4 and junit5) on GitHub.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/blob/master/pom.xml
>>>
>>> Shows that it pulls in hamcrest as a dependency - does that mean it makes
>>> it available
>>> for use ? I don't know.
>>
>> First of all, thank you for all this work, Gav!
>>
>> If you've got information on the complete pack for Junit4 (4.11), can
>> you see if ANY hamcrest jar is included? I personally just manually
>> downloaded hamcrest-core-1.3.jar, put into /usr/share/java and made a
>> sym link called just hamcrest.jar to it.
>
> I don't have a Ubuntu 14 VM handy, but I just got my Ubuntu 16 VM
> working again. Junit doesn't install hamcrest, and python-hamcrest
> doesn't either. The package that does install hamcrest-all.jar is
> libhamcrest-java.
>
Thanks for checking on all this, Don, and you are absolutely correct!
Gav, it seems what we should install on the new 14.04 systems is this:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/libhamcrest1.2-java
This should work with the default junit 4.11. We do not want or need the
hamcrest-python.
Unless something's changed significantly in the junit tests (and I have
not researched this), this should work for us. We used junit 4.11 for
testing on AOO 4.1.1.
--
----------------------------------------
Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice
"Things work out best for those who make
the best of the way things work out."
-- John Wooden
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>.
On 28 Aug, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On 08/27/2016 06:22 PM, Gav wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Don,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>>>>> junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for
>>> use
>>>>> fwiw
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
>>>>>> I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
>>>>>> if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
>>>>>
>>>>> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
>>>>> I think this is it:
>>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
>>>>> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
>>>> download it during a build ?
>>>
>>> That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
>>> question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it as
>>> it is a compiled artifact.
>>>
>>> Based on this old bug report:
>>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you might
>>> want to investigate whether the junit package actually include hamcrest
>>> as well.
>>>
>>>
>> I expanded the install /usr/share/java/junit4.jar and saw no evidence of
>> hamcrest - and
>> the bug you reference is still open, so not fixed I guess :/
>>
>> I found where it is being actively developed (junit4 and junit5) on GitHub.
>>
>> https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/blob/master/pom.xml
>>
>> Shows that it pulls in hamcrest as a dependency - does that mean it makes
>> it available
>> for use ? I don't know.
>
> First of all, thank you for all this work, Gav!
>
> If you've got information on the complete pack for Junit4 (4.11), can
> you see if ANY hamcrest jar is included? I personally just manually
> downloaded hamcrest-core-1.3.jar, put into /usr/share/java and made a
> sym link called just hamcrest.jar to it.
I don't have a Ubuntu 14 VM handy, but I just got my Ubuntu 16 VM
working again. Junit doesn't install hamcrest, and python-hamcrest
doesn't either. The package that does install hamcrest-all.jar is
libhamcrest-java.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/27/2016 06:22 PM, Gav wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>> Hi Don,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>>>>>>> junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for
>> use
>>>> fwiw
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
>>>>> I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
>>>>> if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
>>>>
>>>> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
>>>> I think this is it:
>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
>>>> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
>>> download it during a build ?
>>
>> That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
>> question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it as
>> it is a compiled artifact.
>>
>> Based on this old bug report:
>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you might
>> want to investigate whether the junit package actually include hamcrest
>> as well.
>>
>>
> I expanded the install /usr/share/java/junit4.jar and saw no evidence of
> hamcrest - and
> the bug you reference is still open, so not fixed I guess :/
>
> I found where it is being actively developed (junit4 and junit5) on GitHub.
>
> https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/blob/master/pom.xml
>
> Shows that it pulls in hamcrest as a dependency - does that mean it makes
> it available
> for use ? I don't know.
First of all, thank you for all this work, Gav!
If you've got information on the complete pack for Junit4 (4.11), can
you see if ANY hamcrest jar is included? I personally just manually
downloaded hamcrest-core-1.3.jar, put into /usr/share/java and made a
sym link called just hamcrest.jar to it.
>
> I'm not really here in a coding capacity but to help get the builds up and
> working on
> new buildbot slaves so we can decomission the old ones. I'll help test the
> builds until
> they work, but I hope that dependencies can be resolved internally in the
> project -
> i.e. I hope someone can work with the github code above or an alternative
> and get
> me something I can just install and move on to the next piece.
>
> (same with dmake)
>
> Thanks
>
> Gav...
>
--
--------------------------------------------
MzK
"God helps those who help themselves."
-- popular adage
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
Hi.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >> > Hi Don,
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >> >> > junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for
> use
> >> fwiw
> >> >>
> >> >> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
> >> > I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
> >> > if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
> >>
> >> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
> >> I think this is it:
> >> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
> >> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
> >>
> >>
> > ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
> > download it during a build ?
>
> That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
> question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it as
> it is a compiled artifact.
>
> Based on this old bug report:
> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you might
> want to investigate whether the junit package actually include hamcrest
> as well.
>
>
I expanded the install /usr/share/java/junit4.jar and saw no evidence of
hamcrest - and
the bug you reference is still open, so not fixed I guess :/
I found where it is being actively developed (junit4 and junit5) on GitHub.
https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/blob/master/pom.xml
Shows that it pulls in hamcrest as a dependency - does that mean it makes
it available
for use ? I don't know.
I'm not really here in a coding capacity but to help get the builds up and
working on
new buildbot slaves so we can decomission the old ones. I'll help test the
builds until
they work, but I hope that dependencies can be resolved internally in the
project -
i.e. I hope someone can work with the github code above or an alternative
and get
me something I can just install and move on to the next piece.
(same with dmake)
Thanks
Gav...
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>.
On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>> > Hi Don,
>> >
>> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>> >> > junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use
>> fwiw
>> >>
>> >> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
>> > I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
>> > if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
>>
>> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
>> I think this is it:
>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
>> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
>>
>>
> ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
> download it during a build ?
That was something that Damjan suggested as a possibility, but the
question was whether ext_sources was an appropriate place to stash it as
it is a compiled artifact.
Based on this old bug report:
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/junit/+bug/784631>, you might
want to investigate whether the junit package actually include hamcrest
as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> > Hi Don,
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> >> > junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use
> fwiw
> >>
> >> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
> >>
> >
> > Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
> > I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
> > if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
>
> We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
> I think this is it:
> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-
> all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
>
>
ok, in that case should we just not add it as a buildbot buildstep to
download it during a build ?
Thanks
Gav...
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>.
On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> Hi Don,
>
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
>> > junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use fwiw
>>
>> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>>
>
> Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
> I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
> if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
We don't want python-hamcrest. We just want the hamcrest1.3.jar file.
I think this is it:
<http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/hamcrest/hamcrest-all/1.3/hamcrest-all-1.3.jar>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
Hi Don,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> > junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use fwiw
>
> We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
>
Ubuntu 14.04 LTS python-hamcrest is version 1.8 , is that too new?
I'd like to try and stick to what the Ubuntu apt-get packages provide,
if not possible, alternate uris where we can get other versions from.
Thanks
Gav...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
Gav...
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>.
On 28 Aug, Gav wrote:
> junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use fwiw
We'll also need hamcrest version 1.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Gav <ip...@gmail.com>.
junit 4.11 is installed on the new buildbots we are prepping for use fwiw
Gav...
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2016 04:22 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > Kay Schenk wrote:
> >> Do you really mean 16.04 LTS? Is there a buildbot setup with this? I
> >> am NOT
> >> a Ubuntu person.
> >
> > Yes, I did mean 16.04 LTS. But I see that end of life for 14.04
> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases is April 2019, so 5 years and not 3 as
> > it was for earlier Ubuntu LTS versions. This means 14.04 is OK.
> >
> > That said, if our focus is on making a release then we simply need
> > working buildbots. The current setup (pending the dependency fixes) can
> > be satisfactory too. As a rule of thumb, the newer a (Linux) buildbot
> > is, the less compatible produced builds are - which means they can be
> > tested by fewer people.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
>
> Just now I replaced configure.ac with and older version before the
> specific junit and hamcrest version checking. Hopefully this will get
> our current buildbots rolling again.
>
> The major problem with newer buildbots using Ubuntu is the glibc version
> is newer compared to what is used in our "baseline" Linux, which is
> CentOS5, or even, as I discovered CentOS7. SO, I can't test the builds
> using my CentOS 6.8, for example. Newer end user Linux systems would
> probably not have problems.
>
> The good thing about moving to the Ubuntu 14.04 buildbots was our
> capability to install what we needed basically directly vs putting in
> Jira tix to infra.
>
> I'm hoping the buildbots will run OK this evening.
>
> ps. I think Windows is building --without-junit, so we have an
> inconsistency there.
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> Kay Schenk
> Apache OpenOffice
>
> "Things work out best for those who make
> the best of the way things work out."
> -- John Wooden
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
Gav...
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org>.
On 08/26/2016 04:22 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>> Do you really mean 16.04 LTS? Is there a buildbot setup with this? I
>> am NOT
>> a Ubuntu person.
>
> Yes, I did mean 16.04 LTS. But I see that end of life for 14.04
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases is April 2019, so 5 years and not 3 as
> it was for earlier Ubuntu LTS versions. This means 14.04 is OK.
>
> That said, if our focus is on making a release then we simply need
> working buildbots. The current setup (pending the dependency fixes) can
> be satisfactory too. As a rule of thumb, the newer a (Linux) buildbot
> is, the less compatible produced builds are - which means they can be
> tested by fewer people.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Just now I replaced configure.ac with and older version before the
specific junit and hamcrest version checking. Hopefully this will get
our current buildbots rolling again.
The major problem with newer buildbots using Ubuntu is the glibc version
is newer compared to what is used in our "baseline" Linux, which is
CentOS5, or even, as I discovered CentOS7. SO, I can't test the builds
using my CentOS 6.8, for example. Newer end user Linux systems would
probably not have problems.
The good thing about moving to the Ubuntu 14.04 buildbots was our
capability to install what we needed basically directly vs putting in
Jira tix to infra.
I'm hoping the buildbots will run OK this evening.
ps. I think Windows is building --without-junit, so we have an
inconsistency there.
--
----------------------------------------
Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice
"Things work out best for those who make
the best of the way things work out."
-- John Wooden
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Kay Schenk wrote:
> Do you really mean 16.04 LTS? Is there a buildbot setup with this? I am NOT
> a Ubuntu person.
Yes, I did mean 16.04 LTS. But I see that end of life for 14.04
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases is April 2019, so 5 years and not 3 as
it was for earlier Ubuntu LTS versions. This means 14.04 is OK.
That said, if our focus is on making a release then we simply need
working buildbots. The current setup (pending the dependency fixes) can
be satisfactory too. As a rule of thumb, the newer a (Linux) buildbot
is, the less compatible produced builds are - which means they can be
tested by fewer people.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
wrote:
> On 24/08/2016 Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> Continuing discussion with infra due to EOL on both the systems we are
>> currently using indicates we will probably be moving to Ubuntu 14.04
>> buildbots for Linux 32 and Linux 64. I'll keep you updated.
>>
>
> For the same reason, wouldn't it be better to move to 16.04 LTS actually?
>
> But if this means we'll have broken buildbots for two months then we can
> live with the current ones until the release.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
I didn't copy "dev" on my last question infra -- sorry.
Do you really mean 16.04 LTS? Is there a buildbot setup with this? I am NOT
a Ubuntu person.
The more I thought about this, the more it seemed better to just move to
Ubuntu 14.04 as it would give us better control over what's installed. My
question to them today, was about the 32-bit version of this. I couldn't
identify if a 32-bit buildbot for Ubuntu 14.04 was even available.
I'm assuming at this point they would change the env for our current
buildbot scripts so that wouldn't need to change.I would hope this would be
a quick chageover.
I will copy "dev" on further communication with "infra".
We can get around the broken buildbot problem now by going back a couple of
revisions when the junit version checking was tweaked up. If we don't get a
resolution by next Wed, I'll make the change.
--
--------------------------------------------------
Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice
"Things work out best for those who make
the best of the way things work out."
-- John Wooden
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 24/08/2016 Kay Schenk wrote:
> Continuing discussion with infra due to EOL on both the systems we are
> currently using indicates we will probably be moving to Ubuntu 14.04
> buildbots for Linux 32 and Linux 64. I'll keep you updated.
For the same reason, wouldn't it be better to move to 16.04 LTS actually?
But if this means we'll have broken buildbots for two months then we can
live with the current ones until the release.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
Posted by Kay Schenk <ks...@apache.org>.
[top posting]
Continuing discussion with infra due to EOL on both the systems we are
currently using indicates we will probably be moving to Ubuntu 14.04
buildbots for Linux 32 and Linux 64. I'll keep you updated.
On 08/23/2016 12:19 PM, Kay Schenk@apache.org wrote:
> FYI: communication with pono from infra
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: Questions about buildbot internals
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:31:45 -0700
> From: Kay Schenk@apache.org <ks...@apache.org>
> Reply-To: kschenk@apache.org
> To: Pono Takamori <po...@apache.org>
> CC: infrastructure@apache.org Infrastructure
> <in...@apache.org>, kay.schenk@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> On 08/23/2016 08:52 AM, Pono Takamori wrote:
>> Q1: Are you talking about during a job or as a one time action? I can
>> get lists of currently installed packages on the linux nodes fairly
>> easily, the windows one will be a bit trickier unless you want to know
>> specific versions of your dependencies.
> I'd be happy with a one time action currently. Yeah, Windows is tricky.
>>
>> Q2: We can add those 2 jars to the build nodes. maven 2 should be
>> installed on those boxes, did you need a specific version of it?
>
> OK, I think whatever is out there now is fine for Maven. So, just
> installing these jars is /usr/share/java should do the trick.
>
> and, hmmm...we recommend ant 1.9 or later yet it seems what's on the
> Linux32 buildbot is ant 1.8.2 and on Linux-64 it's ant 1.7.1. Time to
> re-edit our configure.ac -- again.
>
> So, if you could bump the ant version to 1.9.2 on all these that would
> be great. More than 1.9.2 we have problems from my recollection.
>
>
>>
>> In regards to puppet, all three of the build nodes that you mentioned
>> are not in puppet since tethys is running Ubuntu 10.04, bb-vm2 is
>> running 12.04 and we do not have any puppet written for windows yet.
>
> OK, I actually didn't notice that these Linux bots were on different
> Ubuntu versions--gee!
>
>> We could move the builds to a node with 14.04 so that adding
>> dependencies would be you forking the listed repo and then adding the
>> required dependencies
>> here: https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/blob/deployment/data/ubuntu/1404.yaml#L316
>
> hmmm...let me confer with others and I'll get back to you on this. Can
> you get me a pack list for 14.04 as well?
>
>>
>> Let me know if you have any other questions,
>> -Pono
>
> Not right now. Thank you SO much for helping with this. Let's keep in touch!
>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Kay Schenk@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org> <kschenk@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Infra--
>> Apache OpenOffice uses the following buildbots:
>> Linux32 : bb-vm2_ubuntu_32bit
>> Linux64: tethys_ubuntu
>> Windows 7: bb-win7
>>
>> Q1: Short of writing a command line entry into our buildbot
>> scripts, is
>> there any way to get a listing of what packs are installed on
>> these systems?
>>
>> Q2: We need the following packs installed on all three of these for
>> automated testing:
>> junit-4.12.jar
>> hamcrest-core-1.3.jar
>>
>> Maybe maven2 also? But I just ran the tests I needed with "ant"
>> which is
>> part of our build requirements.
>>
>> Through private message, I was sent a link to:
>> https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/tree/deployment/modules/build_slaves
>> <https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-puppet/tree/deployment/modules/build_slaves>
>>
>> as a way of explanation to self-servicing the buildbots, but, not
>> being
>> a puppet guru, I am lost looking at this. Can you describe a basic
>> procedure for me? What type of karma does anyone need? And to what?
>> What's required to upload a new template? Instructions on what
>> should be
>> in the template. How do we initiate pull requests based on the
>> templates, etc?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------
Kay Schenk
Apache OpenOffice
"Things work out best for those who make
the best of the way things work out."
-- John Wooden
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org