Add more release testing automation for Guix releases

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
3 participants
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
  • Ricardo Wurmus
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Severity
important

Debbugs page

pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote 6 years ago
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
20190503085053.e43lzfuczs3vsswp@pelzflorian.localdomain
mate-applets failed to build multiple times in the Guix 1.0 ISO, so
MATE cannot be installed. I guess I should have tested more before
release; not much can be done about it now (you may close this bug if
really not much can be done), however maybe a more thorough testing
checklist or automation may be helpful for future releases.
Ludovic Courtès wrote 6 years ago
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35539@debbugs.gnu.org)
87r29fetwd.fsf@gnu.org
Hi Florian,

"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> skribis:

Toggle quote (6 lines)
> mate-applets failed to build multiple times in the Guix 1.0 ISO, so
> MATE cannot be installed. I guess I should have tested more before
> release; not much can be done about it now (you may close this bug if
> really not much can be done), however maybe a more thorough testing
> checklist or automation may be helpful for future releases.

Bah indeed. pluma and mate-applets both fail to build. :-/

I agree we need more automation here. One way to do this would be
something like ‘make assert-binaries-available’, which checks for
substitute availability (it could be a prerequisite of ‘make dist’),
where we’d explicitly check for DEs on x86_64 and i686. That would be
an improvement, though it’d still be quite handcrafted.

Ludo’.
Ricardo Wurmus wrote 6 years ago
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
87ef5fhks5.fsf@elephly.net
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

Toggle quote (12 lines)
> Hi Florian,
>
> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> skribis:
>
>> mate-applets failed to build multiple times in the Guix 1.0 ISO, so
>> MATE cannot be installed. I guess I should have tested more before
>> release; not much can be done about it now (you may close this bug if
>> really not much can be done), however maybe a more thorough testing
>> checklist or automation may be helpful for future releases.
>
> Bah indeed. pluma and mate-applets both fail to build. :-/

I have fixed them shortly after the release. This doesn’t help users of
the release, of course.

--
Ricardo
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote 6 years ago
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)(address . 35539@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190503185007.56eyemvqa2pgjjkv@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 12:04:18PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Toggle quote (8 lines)
> I agree we need more automation here. One way to do this would be
> something like ‘make assert-binaries-available’, which checks for
> substitute availability (it could be a prerequisite of ‘make dist’),
> where we’d explicitly check for DEs on x86_64 and i686. That would be
> an improvement, though it’d still be quite handcrafted.
>
> Ludo’.

This overlaps with the need for (eventually) a stable branch, I think.

Regards,
Florian
Ludovic Courtès wrote 6 years ago
control message for bug #35539
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
871s0ygx60.fsf@gnu.org
severity 35539 important
Ludovic Courtès wrote 6 years ago
Re: bug#35539: Add more release testing automation for Guix releases
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35539-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
87y334ug09.fsf@gnu.org
Hello,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> skribis:

Toggle quote (5 lines)
> I agree we need more automation here. One way to do this would be
> something like ‘make assert-binaries-available’, which checks for
> substitute availability (it could be a prerequisite of ‘make dist’),
> where we’d explicitly check for DEs on x86_64 and i686.

I did that in 762ba22efe01006d959503dc368ee54b16ccea31; 1.0.1 will
definitely have substitutes for MATE, GNOME, etc.

There’s surely still room for improvement in that area, but let’s open
more specific bugs as we see fit.

Thanks,
Ludo’.
Closed
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 35539@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 35539
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch
You may also tag this issue. See list of standard tags. For example, to set the confirmed and easy tags
mumi command -t +confirmed -t +easy
Or, remove the moreinfo tag and set the help tag
mumi command -t -moreinfo -t +help