IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Now that `cosa build-fast` writes to `.cosa`, teach our
test suite to pick that up by default. We don't anymore
support non-CoreOS (i.e. non-Ignition) hosts for our test
suite, so making this more CoreOS specific is fine.
Then use the "standard" COSA_DIR as a way to find the target
cosa dir in the e2e CI.
We now have bidirectional calling between Rust and C++,
but we are generating two static libraries that we then
link together with a tiny C++ `main.cxx`.
Let's make another huge leap towards oxdiation by
having Rust be the entrypoint. This way cargo natively
takes care of linking the internal Rust library, and
our C++ internals become the library.
In other words, we've now fully inverted from
"C app with internal Rust library"
to "Rust binary with internal C++ library".
In order to make this work though we have to finally
kill the C unit tests. But mostly everything covered
there is either being converted to Rust, or covered
elsewhere anyways.
Now as the doc comments in `main.rs` say...this is
a bit awkward because all the CLI code is still in C++.
Porting stuff to use e.g. `structopt` natively would
be a bit of a slog. For now, we basically rely on
the fact that the Rust-native CLIs are all hidden
commands.
Update submodule: libdnf
Our CI isn't running the C unit tests because it goes via RPM,
and while we could potentially add `%check` there...I don't
quite want to do that right now since it also runs the Rust
tests which means we rebuild all the Rust code again in debug
mode etc.
Change the C unit tests to compile in C++ mode, which is
enough for local testing.
Longer term I think the C unit tests will go away in favor
of Rust tests.
In the previous buildsytem rework we disabled the unit tests because
of linking problems. Now I realized that a simple solution is
to continue to build one big object, just make it an internal
static library and have a tiny "stub main" that delegates to an entrypoint.
That's basically what the C unit tests are - an alternative `main()`
with some extra code.
These link to librpmostreepriv.la which will be going away.
I think we should basically focus on moving code into Rust which
has a solid solution for this in `#[test]` and debug vs release
builds etc.
I still think we should do this at some point, but
the experiment with using `GKeyfile` for configuration
is IMO a failure and the variety of data formats
(treefile JSON vs YAML vs origin keyfiles vs container keyfiles)
causes a lot of confusion.
Prep for https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/issues/2326
This is part of investigating using https://cxx.rs/
In order to make this really work, we need to convert some of our C
code to C++ so we can include cxx.rs-generated code.
This starts by converting just two files as a starting point.
I did the minimal porting; I didn't try to actually rewrite them
to resemble modern C++, just "C in C++ mode".
There's a lot going on here, but essentially:
1. We change the `vmcheck` model so that it always operates on an
immutable base image. It takes that image and dynamically launches a
separate VM for each test using `kola spawn`. This means we can drop
a lot of hacks around re-using the same VMs.
2. Following from 1., `vmoverlay` now takes as input a base image,
overlays the built rpm-ostree bits, then creates a new base image. Of
course, we don't have to do this in CI, because we build FCOS with
the freshly built RPMs (so it uses `SKIP_VMOVERLAY=1`). `vmoverlay`
then will be more for the developer case where one doesn't want to
iterate via `cosa build` to test rpm-ostree changes. I say "will"
because the functionality doesn't exist yet; I'd like to enhance
`cosa dev-overlay` to do this. (Note `vmsync` should still works just
as before too.)
3. `vmcheck` can be run without building the tree first, as
`tests/vmcheck.sh`. The `make vmcheck` target still exists though for
finger compatibility and better meshing with `vmoverlay` in the
developer case.
What's really nice about using kola spawn is that it takes care of a lot
of things for us, such as the qemu command, journal and console
gathering, and SSH.
Similarly to the compose testsuites, we're using parallel here to run
multiple vmcheck tests at once. (On developer laptops, we cap
parallelism at `$(nproc) - 1`).
This is a hack to allow using `inject-pkglist` without having to build
the tree first.
Higher-level, I think we can split this back out again if we have a
`-tests` subpackage where we ship the vmcheck testsuite.
Now we stop running rpm-ostreed as non-root, which is going to be
a maintenance pain going forward. If we do introduce non-VM based
tests I think we should look to doing in-container testing.
Closes: #1339
Approved by: cgwalters
Following up to: https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/pull/1336
It makes sense to keep the library tests as unit tests (although
we should also support doing them installed).
The upgrade-rebase tests will move into vmcheck/ soon.
Closes: #1338
Approved by: jlebon
This was caught by the abicheck in Fedora; since we were building with default
visibility for `librpmostreepriv.la` which was linked statically into the public
library, we'd end up with lots of internals as public ABI.
Fix this by using `-fvisibility=private` for the libpriv build and for good
measure elsewhere so we remember to use it by default.
Closes: #1320
Approved by: jlebon
This adds a shell primitive to make it easy to execute a playbook
task list.
The big picture idea is to sync with https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/pull/1462
and rewrite some of the libvm shell stuff as playbooks, allowing easier
code sharing with a-h-t and just in general being a better library for
talking ssh and executing commnads.
Closes: #1297
Approved by: jlebon
This patch introduces a new `AutomaticUpdatePolicy` configuration. This
was a long time coming for rpm-ostree, given that its update model makes
it extremely apt for such a feature.
The config supports a `check` mode, which should be very useful to
Atomic Workstation users, as well as a `reboot` mode, which could be
used in its present form in simple single node Atomic Host situations.
There is still a lot of work to be done, including integrating
advisories, and supporting a `deploy` mode. This feature hopefully will
be leveraged as well by higher-level projects like GNOME Software and
Cockpit.
Closes: #1147
Approved by: cgwalters
It took me way, way, way too long to debug that my dev container somehow missing
`ostree-grub2` caused the script to fail early, but we'd still continue trying
to sync, leading to us not actually changing the installed `rpm-ostree` binary,
leading to test suite failures.
Also add the chmod hammer at the top so we can delete even if we fail after
doing an rsync.
Closes: #1115
Approved by: jlebon
Added unit tests for rpm-ostree ex kargs --delete,
--append and --replace.
Also exposed two getter functions for kargs table
and array so people can retrieve information from
kargs.
Also includes a minor fix for a bug caught by the unit
test.
Closes: #1013
Approved by: cgwalters
This was supposed to be part of #968. `HACKING.md` already refers to
a `SKIP_INSTALL` variable, which basically ensures that we use the
install tree as-is.
Closes: #1032
Approved by: cgwalters
This is the rpm-ostree equivalent of
<47b4dd1b38>
Unfortunately, introspection uses `dlopen(), which doesn't quite
work when the DSO is compiled with ASAN but the outer executable
isn't.
Prep for syncing PAPR config with ostree.
Closes: #1000
Approved by: jlebon
I had meant for this to be in the other PR#968. I originally did both
`make` and `make install` there, but now it only does `make install`, so
let's just rename it to make that more obvious.
Closes: #953
Approved by: cgwalters
Let's make using a custom install tree easier and document the process.
We split out the insttree step into `build.sh` so that we no longer have
to `flock(1)` around it, and also share between `overlay.sh` and
`sync.sh`.
Closes: #968
Approved by: cgwalters
I actually stopped using this a long time ago. Looking at it now, it
doesn't make much sense in multi-host situations. Let's just nix it.
Closes: #899
Approved by: cgwalters
For https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/299 we need to make it
more convenient to substitute the architecture in an installation
context. I plan to use this API inside `rpmostreepayload` in Anaconda,
so we can substitute the same value of `${basearch}` we use in treefiles
since https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/pull/305
Now, you might wonder - why do we need an API wrapping libdnf? It's because
libdnf is not API stable yet. We're just exposing a tiny subset. In theory we
could use the Python dnf bindings in Anaconda, but things get slightly weird if
rpmostreepayload depends on dnf. Perhaps we'll do that down the road, but for
now this a small API surface to maintain (forever).
This change reworks the internal `varsubst` bits to take a pure `DnfContext`,
since we don't want to spin up a whole `RpmOstreeContext` just to do some
string substitutions.
Closes: #877
Approved by: jlebon
Now that PAPR has support for pre-release images of Fedora Atomic Host
26, let's start testing there. We mark it as not required for the time
being.
Closes: #860
Approved by: cgwalters
Nuke all the previous goop that was used to create RPMs at `make check`
time and transition all the tests to use the new `build_rpm` function.
It definitely feels cleaner to use. It's also really nice to have the
spec live in the same file as the test that uses it.
Closes: #854
Approved by: cgwalters
Import libostreetest.c from ostreedev/ostree as libtest.c. This is just
a really useful and outrageous way of using libtest.sh from C.
Closes: #854
Approved by: cgwalters
It seems silly that to find out more detailed information about the
NEVRA of a cached pkg, we have to resort to write out the header to
disk, then reading it back in with librpm in order to tease out the info
we want. Let's just encode that information directly in the commit
metadata and provide a helper to fetch it.
Closes: #847
Approved by: cgwalters
I didn't realize at the time I wrote the cache_branch_to_nevra test that
the already existing test-utils.c would be the perfect place to add this
test. Merge the two together now.
Closes: #847
Approved by: cgwalters
There are a few different use cases here. First, for layering new packages,
there's no good reason for us to force a reboot. Second, we want some support
for cherry-picking security updates and allowing admins to restart services. Finally,
at some point we should offer support for entirely replacing the running tree
if that's what the user wants.
Until now we've been very conservative, but there's a spectrum here. In
particular, this patch changes things so we push a rollback before we start
doing anything live. I think in practice, many use cases would be totally fine
with doing most changes live, and falling back to the rollback if something went
wrong.
This initial code drop *only* supports live layering of new packages. However,
a lot of the base infrastructure is laid for future work.
For now, this will be classified as an experimental feature, hence `ex livefs`.
Part of: https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/639Closes: #652
Approved by: jlebon
I want to use this in livefs, where I'll end up doing some diff
computations on the server and am currently rendering text there.
It might also be a step towards using this in `db diff`.
Closes: #709
Approved by: jlebon
Allow the `make vmcheck` target to take a HOSTS var, which is simply a
space-separated list of hosts on which we can run testsuites. Add a
multitest.py script that takes care of monitoring and scheduling the
tests onto the nodes.
The script itself is "dumb": we don't know how long each test can take,
so we can't do any smart/heuristic scheduling that could save more time.
Closes: #675
Approved by: cgwalters
We start by adding support in the core for installing packages strictly
from the cache repo. We fool the libdnf stack by re-exporting the header
as an RPM, and explicitly marking it for install. The treefile format
supports specifying the expected SHA-256 of the metadata header, in case
the cache for a specific NEVRA changed.
Closes: #657
Approved by: cgwalters
See https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/233 - for RPMs which
place files in e.g. `/opt`, we have different behavior in the treecompose case
(silently drop it) versus package layering (does the wrong thing).
Since the unpacker right now is only used in the layering case, this just
ensures we'll get a consistent error there.
Closes: #624
Approved by: jlebon
This is useful when you want to rerun vmcheck after changing the test
case (rather than any compiled code), so no new overlay is actually
required.
Closes: #561
Approved by: cgwalters
This is just the final bit required to make sure the vagrant and
non-vagrant paths can work happily together. It's mostly minor fixes,
though the most major change which also affects vagrant is that we now
sync to the root home dir, rather than ~vagrant.
Closes: #524
Approved by: cgwalters
My development environment is now using "pet" docker containers.
I use VMs for testing things that require that (like rpm-ostree).
This patch builds on work from @jlebon in
https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/pull/509
to rework `vmcheck` such that it can work on any `ssh-config`. By
default we expect this to be Vagrant.
However, I go a lot farther and delete the `vmbuild` code that was
trying to do builds in a container on the target VM. I think this is
still worth pursuing at some point, but for now I think it's
reasonable to assume that the rpm-ostree developer audience uses Linux
as their host workstation and hence has containers.
(There's another important point here in that for developing lower
level things like rpm-ostree, there's a strong push to make the VM
disposable and not a pet)
Closes: #516
Approved by: jlebon
Thought it'd be fun to write a test for verifying proper handling of
scriptlets during package layering. There's obviously a lot more that
could go in here (patches welcome!), but it's a start.
Closes: #434
Approved by: cgwalters
