Regarding the pep8 breakage - Try updating your pep8.

From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "patrick hurrelmann" <patrick.hurrelmann(a)lobster.de&gt;, "oVirt Mailing List" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "vdsm-devel" <vdsm-devel(a)fedorahosted.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:31:04 PM Subject: Re: [vdsm] [Users] Low quality of el6 vdsm rpms Il 12/11/2013 10:34, Patrick Hurrelmann ha scritto: > Hi all, > > sorry for this rant, but... > > I now tried several times to test the beta 3.3.1 rpms, but they can't > even be installed in the most times. I'm glad to read you're testing 3.3.1. May I ask you to add yourself to http://www.ovirt.org/Testing/Ovirt_3.3.1_testing ? > One time it required a future > selinux-policy, although the needed selinux fix was delivered in a much > lower version. Now the rpms have broken requirements. It requires > "hostname" instead of "/bin/hostname". This broken requirement is not > included in the vdsm 3.3 branch, so I wonder where it comes from? > Anyway. So I proceeded and tried to build vdsm myself once again. > Currently the build fails with (but worked fine some days ago): > > /usr/bin/pep8 --exclude="config.py,constants.py" --filename '*.py,*.py.in' > \ > client lib/cpopen/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py.in tests > vds_bootstrap vdsm-tool vdsm/*.py vdsm/*.py.in vdsm/netconf > vdsm/sos/vdsm.py.in vdsm/storage vdsm/vdsm vdsm_api vdsm_hooks vdsm_reg > vdsm/storage/imageRepository/formatConverter.py:280:29: E128 > continuation line under-indented for visual indent > > > - How can the quality of the vdsm builds be increased? It is frustrating > to spend time on testing and then the hosts cannot even be installed to > broken vdsm rpms. > - How are the builds prepared? Is there a Jenkins job that prepares > "stable" rpms in addition to the nightly job? Or is this totally > handcrafted? > - How can it be that the rpm spec differs between the 3.3 branch and > released rpms? What is the source/branch for el6 vdsm rpms? Maybe I'm > just tracking on the wrong source tree... Since this is VDSM related, adding vdsm-devel list to the discussion. > > Thx and Regards > Patrick > > -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt;, dcaro(a)redhat.com Cc: "vdsm-devel" <vdsm-devel(a)fedorahosted.org&gt;, "oVirt Mailing List" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:33:44 PM Subject: Re: [Users] Low quality of el6 vdsm rpms On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:31:04AM +0100, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > Il 12/11/2013 10:34, Patrick Hurrelmann ha scritto: > > Hi all, > > > > sorry for this rant, but... Thanks for ranting. Community testing and ranting are to be cherished. We must improve in the points you have raised. > > > > I now tried several times to test the beta 3.3.1 rpms, but they can't > > even be installed in the most times. > > I'm glad to read you're testing 3.3.1. May I ask you to add yourself to > http://www.ovirt.org/Testing/Ovirt_3.3.1_testing ? > > > One time it required a future > > selinux-policy, although the needed selinux fix was delivered in a much > > lower version. Now the rpms have broken requirements. It requires > > "hostname" instead of "/bin/hostname". This broken requirement is not > > included in the vdsm 3.3 branch, so I wonder where it comes from? > > Anyway. So I proceeded and tried to build vdsm myself once again. > > Currently the build fails with (but worked fine some days ago): > > > > /usr/bin/pep8 --exclude="config.py,constants.py" --filename > > '*.py,*.py.in' \ > > client lib/cpopen/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py.in tests > > vds_bootstrap vdsm-tool vdsm/*.py vdsm/*.py.in vdsm/netconf > > vdsm/sos/vdsm.py.in vdsm/storage vdsm/vdsm vdsm_api vdsm_hooks vdsm_reg > > vdsm/storage/imageRepository/formatConverter.py:280:29: E128 > > continuation line under-indented for visual indent > > > > > > - How can the quality of the vdsm builds be increased? It is frustrating > > to spend time on testing and then the hosts cannot even be installed to > > broken vdsm rpms. I suspect you are not interested in "excuses" for each of the failures, let us look forwards. My conclusions are: - Do not require non-yet-existing rpms. If we require a feature that is not yet in Fedora/Centos, we must wait. This is already in effect, see for example http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/20248/ and http://gerrit.ovirt.org/19545 - There's a Jenkins job to enforce the former requirement of spec requirement. David, Sandro, any idea why it is not running these days?

- Keep the docs updated. Our Jenkins slaves have pep8-1.4.6, so we should update http://www.ovirt.org/Vdsm_Developers#Installing_required_packages accordingly - and more importantly, make that version available. Sandro, who built the python-pep8-1.4.6 that sits on the el6 Jenkins slave? Could you make it publicly available? (I can volunteer http://danken.fedorapeople.org again)

> > - How are the builds prepared? Is there a Jenkins job that prepares > > "stable" rpms in addition to the nightly job? Or is this totally > > handcrafted?

> > - How can it be that the rpm spec differs between the 3.3 branch and > > released rpms? What is the source/branch for el6 vdsm rpms? Maybe I'm > > just tracking on the wrong source tree... Based on your reports, you are tracking the correct tree; but please describe which differences do you see (and between what releases exactly). Regards, Dan. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:31:24AM -0500, Eyal Edri wrote: > <snip> > > - Keep the docs updated. Our Jenkins slaves have pep8-1.4.6, so we > > should update > > http://www.ovirt.org/Vdsm_Developers#Installing_required_packages > > accordingly - and more importantly, make that version available. > > > > Sandro, who built the python-pep8-1.4.6 that sits on the el6 Jenkins > > slave? Could you make it publicly available? (I can volunteer > > http://danken.fedorapeople.org again) > > i tend to agree here with patrick on using non released pep8 packages, that are not available > via rpms, but only via python-pip. > the jenkins slaves were updated via pyhon-pip and not via yum upgrade. Eyal, I do not understand your opinion here... In any case, I've added http://danken.fedorapeople.org/python-pep8-1.4.5-2.el6.noarch.rpm if anyone find this unsigned unsupported hardly tested package useful.

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:31:04AM +0100, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > Il 12/11/2013 10:34, Patrick Hurrelmann ha scritto: >> Hi all, >> >> sorry for this rant, but... Thanks for ranting. Community testing and ranting are to be cherished. We must improve in the points you have raised. >> >> I now tried several times to test the beta 3.3.1 rpms, but they can't >> even be installed in the most times. > > I'm glad to read you're testing 3.3.1. May I ask you to add yourself to > http://www.ovirt.org/Testing/Ovirt_3.3.1_testing ? > >> One time it required a future >> selinux-policy, although the needed selinux fix was delivered in a much >> lower version. Now the rpms have broken requirements. It requires >> "hostname" instead of "/bin/hostname". This broken requirement is not >> included in the vdsm 3.3 branch, so I wonder where it comes from?

On 11/12/2013 03:51 PM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf wrote: > > Indeed, that's bad. It has been included from a patch only on Fedora > koji build rawhide. The others points here already have been answered by > others developers. Anyway, we have updated the build. > > We would appreciate if you could continue the tests with the new test > build: > > F19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172359 > F20: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172521 > EL6: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172612 > > This last update includes the following patches: > - The require hostname fix > - upgrade-fix-v3ResetMetaVolSize-argument > - lvm-Do-not-use-udev-cache-for-obtaining-device-list > - Fix-ballooning-rules-for-computing-the-minimum-avail > - Avoid-M2Crypto-races > - spec-declare-we-provide-an-existing-python-cpopen > - configuring-selinux-allowing-qemu-kvm-to-generate-co > > @Mike, can you please update the testing candidate repo? > Packages updated in beta repo

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 03:51:36PM -0500, Douglas Schilling Landgraf wrote: > > Indeed, that's bad. It has been included from a patch only on Fedora > koji build rawhide. The others points here already have been > answered by others developers. Anyway, we have updated the build. > > We would appreciate if you could continue the tests with the new test build: > > F19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172359 > F20: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172521 > EL6: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6172612 > > This last update includes the following patches: > - The require hostname fix (http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/21194/ should have been sent to gerrit long ago, I suppose)

Hi, can someone elaborate on this fix?

Is something broken with the ballooning-rules in the current vdsm? If yes, what is it, and can it be circumvented until a new vdsm stable release hits the ovirt.org repo? Thanks in advance! Am 12.11.2013 21:51, schrieb Douglas Schilling Landgraf: > - Fix-ballooning-rules-for-computing-the-minimum-avail

Hi, is there any chance that the fixes for this bug get into 3.3.x or at least 3.4 ? I see no targeted Milestone for it, and this is something I would consider a core feature, which should "just work".

Ah, thanks for the hint, the "fixed bugs" list is quite long, so I didn't read everything, I will give this some testing if it is already in 3.3.1-2 beta (not mentioned in release notes?), but I think it will work, this release seems very stable and focused to me.

OT: Why is there no announcement for beta releases on the announcement list? To keep traffic low? The last message is from 16.10.2013 so you shouldn't be feared to "spam" this list (imho). ;)

Am 15.11.2013 18:05, schrieb Douglas Schilling Landgraf: > Hi Sven, > > On 11/15/2013 05:42 AM, Sven Kieske wrote: >> Hi, >> >> is there any chance that the fixes for this bug >> get into 3.3.x or at least 3.4 ? >> I see no targeted Milestone for it, and this is something >> I would consider a core feature, which should "just work". > > It's targeted for 3.3.1 and it shows in release notes for VDSM: > http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.3.1_release_notes

From: "Patrick Hurrelmann" <patrick.hurrelmann(a)lobster.de&gt; To: "oVirt Mailing List" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:34:20 AM Subject: [Users] Low quality of el6 vdsm rpms Hi all, sorry for this rant, but... /usr/bin/pep8 --exclude="config.py,constants.py" --filename '*.py,*.py.in' \ client lib/cpopen/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py.in tests vds_bootstrap vdsm-tool vdsm/*.py vdsm/*.py.in vdsm/netconf vdsm/sos/vdsm.py.in vdsm/storage vdsm/vdsm vdsm_api vdsm_hooks vdsm_reg vdsm/storage/imageRepository/formatConverter.py:280:29: E128 continuation line under-indented for visual indent