Merge lp://staging/~fginther/auto-package-testing/adtjob-separate-archs into lp://staging/~canonical-ci-engineering/auto-package-testing/add-boottest-requests

Proposed by Francis Ginther
Status: Merged
Approved by: Francis Ginther
Approved revision: 403
Merged at revision: 405
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~fginther/auto-package-testing/adtjob-separate-archs
Merge into: lp://staging/~canonical-ci-engineering/auto-package-testing/add-boottest-requests
Diff against target: 67 lines (+13/-7)
1 file modified
jenkins/adtjob.py (+13/-7)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~fginther/auto-package-testing/adtjob-separate-archs
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Vincent Ladeuil (community) Approve
Paul Larson Approve
Auto Package Testing Developers Pending
Review via email: mp+250198@code.staging.launchpad.net

This proposal supersedes a proposal from 2015-02-18.

Commit message

Separate out ARCHS between adt and boottest jobs in adtjob.py.

Description of the change

Separate out ARCHS between adt and boottest jobs in adtjob.py. For boottest results, we only want to look at the krillin 'arch'. Likewise, we don't want to look for extra archs when processing adt results.

This has been working because boottest-britney only looks for krillin results to generate a global result.

This is to address pitti's comment from [1]:
Wouldn't this change the outcome for "normal" package tests, too? We create NEEDRUN states in update_status() for all ARCHS entries, thus we'd pile up NEEDRUN states for all packages for the nonexisting "krillin" architecture; and likewise, for the boottests we don't need i386/amd64/all, so it might be better to split this in two?

[1] - https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering/auto-package-testing/add-boottest-requests/+merge/248936

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Paul Larson (pwlars) wrote :

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Of course, it would make sense to get an ack from pitti too at least since this is to address a concern he expressed in the other review.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote :

That's a welcome clarification, well done !

Are you confident we could try this with our staging env while we wait for https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering/auto-package-testing/add-boottest-requests/+merge/248936 to be reviewed/landed ?

review: Approve

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches