autoqa-devel July 2011

autoqa-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org

12 participants
91 discussions

[AutoQA] #251: Move autotest applications into /usr/*bin
by fedora-badges 26 Sep '12

26 Sep '12

#251: Move autotest applications into /usr/*bin -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Packaging, Review, & Deployment Component: packaging | Keywords: -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- The autotest package should supply binaries in /usr/bin/ ... so we can rely on PATH and not have to call autotest with the full-path (/usr/share/autotest/client/bin/autotest) when scheduling jobs in '/usr/bin/autoqa'. Alternatively, the autotest package could drop a script that updates PATH appropriately into /etc/profile.d/autotest. But yuck. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/251> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 2

[AutoQA] #191: Submit autotest for Fedora package approval
by fedora-badges 26 Sep '12

26 Sep '12

#191: Submit autotest for Fedora package approval -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Packaging and Review Component: packaging | Version: 1.0 Keywords: | -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548522 Currently stalled, pending packaging of the gwt package. This includes packaging all bundled .jar files included with gwt. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/191> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 3

[AutoQA] #157: conflicts: requested arch not respected
by fedora-badges 06 Aug '12

06 Aug '12

#157: conflicts: requested arch not respected --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: tests | Version: 1.0 Keywords: | --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- This is a bug in the potential_conflict.py script in tests/conflicts/. Usage suggests using --arch options for specifying requested architecture to be tested. But if you look at the attached log, the first and second output match (that's correct), but the third doesn't match, even though it should. Everything was tested on x86_64 machine. Also from the usage line it is not clear whether --arch is related only to particular yum repository selection (replacing $basearch keyword), or whether it also relates to packages built for one architecture but being in different repo (e.g. i686 packages are very often in x86_64 repo). I have looked into the source code of the script and it seems that the --arch option is not used at all, just printed out in the usage help?? Seth, you're listed as script author. Any comments on that? Thanks. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/157> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 7

[AutoQA] #270: Package and submit for review - compat-Django-1.0.4
by fedora-badges 02 Aug '12

02 Aug '12

#270: Package and submit for review - compat-Django-1.0.4 -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Package Update Acceptance Test Plan Component: packaging | Keywords: -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Currently packaged so that it can coexist with the current Django package (see http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/fedora- qa/autoqa/fedora-14-testing/). I need to port existing security patches linked from http://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2010/dec/22/security/ Once patched, submit for review ... and enjoy. Eventually autotest will be updated to use Django-1.2 ... but packaging Django-1.0.4 removes one more packaging obstacle to having autotest as an official Fedora package. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/270> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 2

[AutoQA] #329: implement RPM checksum verification
by fedora-badges 30 Jul '12

30 Jul '12

#329: implement RPM checksum verification -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Finger Food Component: core | Keywords: -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Currently this method is in autoqa.util module: {{{ 261 def valid_rpm(rpm_file): 262 '''Check that RPM file is valid. 263 Note: This currently only extracts RPM header and presumes the file is 264 OK if that succeeds. Full RPM hashsum check would be nice to have 265 implemented too (FIXME). 266 @param rpm_file RPM file path 267 @return True if file seems OK or False if there is some problem (file 268 can't be read, RPM header is corrupt) 269 ''' ... }}} We would like to have full RPM checksum verification, not just reading the header and saying that it's OK. Find out how to do it and change the method accordingly. It would be nice to have a method argument to enable full checksum verification/fall back to original header verification, because it can be performance intensive operation and it may not be suitable for all our use cases). -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/329> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 3

[AutoQA] #206: Update bodhi to enforce Package Update Acceptance policy
by fedora-badges 26 Mar '12

26 Mar '12

#206: Update bodhi to enforce Package Update Acceptance policy ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Reporter: wwoods | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Package Update Acceptance Test Plan Component: infrastructure | Version: 1.0 Keywords: | ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- In order to enforce the Package Update Acceptance Test Plan, Bodhi will need be modified to reject the push of any package that fails acceptance testing. The acceptance tests may need to send status/data to bodhi in order for it to make decisions about policy (see e.g. ticket #205). Later bodhi might just get data from resultdb (see that milestone for details). -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/206> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 7

[AutoQA] #252: Provide all autotest client combinations that we need
by fedora-badges 16 Mar '12

16 Mar '12

#252: Provide all autotest client combinations that we need ------------------------+--------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0 Component: production | Keywords: ------------------------+--------------------------------------------------- Currently our production server at http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/ has 6 autotest clients assigned, all bare metals with Fedora 13 installed, with mixed architectures. But we need more. According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Managing_autotest_labels we have two architecture labels, two fedora release labels (the two currently supported Fedora releases, I would omit Rawhide for now) and two virt labels (virtual machine or bare metal). We need machines for every combination of those labels (that is 8 IICC - if I count correctly). And we would like to see a bit more 64bit machines, because we use them for noarch tests. Currently the only test that really requires all those combinations is initscripts test. But there will be more in the future. It is quite some farm, but it seems we'll have to build it. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/252> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 3

[AutoQA] #255: Use Config class to simplify access to configuration options
by fedora-badges 07 Mar '12

07 Mar '12

#255: Use Config class to simplify access to configuration options --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: core | Keywords: --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Currently all our libraries and tests use ConfigParser and parse our configuration files (autoqa.conf, fas.conf, etc) directly. That is not ideal, it involves many lines of code, converting to correct variable types (int, bool), handling default values, and so on. We should create a Python class Config, which is initialized once in the beginning, and then can be access globally and easily from any other module. It will handle default values and type conversion centrally in one place. Also access will be much easier. PS: We already have autoqa.config module. Maybe we just don't use it? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/255> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 6

[AutoQA] #350: Add support for using file proxy
by fedora-badges 07 Mar '12

07 Mar '12

#350: Add support for using file proxy -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Future tasks Component: core | Keywords: -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Currently we allow to cache downloaded RPMs with allow_pkg_cache in autoqa.conf. That uses our own code in util.py:download(). Tim was talking about using file proxy and it now seems to me as a far better approach. It can cache more files (like yum metadata, ISO files, etc). The proxy can run on the same computer or on some local-network computer. Several computers can share the same proxy. We don't have to care about storing the files and cleaning up the directories. It means less code. It's transparent for us. The task now is to play with some proxy, try whether it works, implement some support for AutoQA (if required), and document the process of setting it up (probably in [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_Development here]). -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/350> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 9

[AutoQA] #338: AutoQATest.version - is it needed?
by fedora-badges 06 Mar '12

06 Mar '12

#338: AutoQATest.version - is it needed? -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: trivial | Milestone: Finger Food Component: tests | Keywords: -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- In all our tests we have code like this: {{{ class rpmlint(AutoQATest): version = 1 # increment if setup() changes }}} The question is - is the ''version'' attribute needed and being used at all? I have never seen any difference in behavior, the setup() phase is run every time. We should have look at autotest documentation or source code whether this is being used and when. If we don't need it, let's remove it from all our tests and templates (the less code the better). -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/338> AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org> Automated QA project

1 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

autoqa-devel July 2011