search

ceph / chacra

A binary/file REST API to aid in multi-distro|arch|release management
9 stars 16 forks source link

util,models/: include .ddeb when building deb repos #267

Closed tchaikov closed 4 years ago

tchaikov commented 4 years ago

Signed-off-by: Kefu Chai kchai@redhat.com

alfredodeza commented 4 years ago

I can't find any references to includeddeb in reprepro except for https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1173171.html

Do you happen to know what version actually supports this?

tchaikov commented 4 years ago

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:09 PM Alfredo Deza notifications@github.com wrote:

I can't find any references to includeddeb in reprepro except for https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1173171.html

includeddeb is supported by https://github.com/ionos-enterprise/reprepro/ . not by the vanilla version of reprepro

Do you happen to know what version actually supports this?

— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ceph/chacra/pull/267?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAONPYRXHOPEWQPXIAULMLQFKSQ7A5CNFSM4IMVOXVKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4TB7DA#issuecomment-522592140, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAONP2X5YCDKQN3PJPEZTTQFKSQ7ANCNFSM4IMVOXVA .

-- Regards Kefu Chai

dmick commented 4 years ago

It'd be nice to have a reason for this change documented anywhere; here'd be fine

ktdreyer commented 4 years ago

Have Debian or Canonical switched to a reprepro fork? If they are switching, let's use whatever they are using. If they're not switching, I'd like to ask why.

tchaikov commented 4 years ago

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:26 AM Ken Dreyer notifications@github.com wrote:

Have Debian or Canonical switched to a reprepro fork? If they are switching, let's use whatever they are using. If they're not switching, I'd like to ask why.

neither. i am afraid that i am in no position to answer this question. what i know is that the upstream maintainer is not responding to the bug report. see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=570623

— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ceph/chacra/pull/267?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAONP7CGXHWGQNDY3HSHG3QNSYD3A5CNFSM4IMVOXVKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEAUY2YQ#issuecomment-539594082, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAONP7CBOS7VTKBIRQP4XDQNSYD3ANCNFSM4IMVOXVA .

-- Regards Kefu Chai

ktdreyer commented 4 years ago

Here's what I'm getting at: If a critical piece of debian's infrastructure is unmaintained, maybe this is a signal about the stability of Debian, and we should start deprecating our Debian support in the ceph.com infrastructure.

tchaikov commented 4 years ago

@ktdreyer i don't think we should lower the priority of Debian support. it's just the maintainer of reprepro is not responding to the bug. FWIW, the upstream source repo is still being updated. see https://salsa.debian.org/brlink/reprepro/tree/master. also, i am not sure if reprepro is a critical piece of Debian infra. Debian's official repo is hosted using dak. see https://wiki.debian.org/DebianRepository/Setup .

on the contrary, instead of abandoning this distro and possibly its derivatives, i think we should either use a fork of reprepro or use alternative software or service for providing better service to our users.

djgalloway commented 4 years ago

I don't think this actually got pushed to the chacra nodes until today. And now repos are failing to get created.

[2019-10-31 00:44:11,832: INFO/Worker-4] running command: reprepro --confdir /opt/chacra/src/chacra/distributions/ceph -b /opt/repos/ceph/wip-luminous_12.2.13_RC1/621946465d82463e8dc9e3a63fec357272e39d04/ubuntu/bionic/flavors/default -C main --ignore=wrongdistribution --ignore=wrongversion --ignore=undefinedtarget includedeb bionic /opt/binaries/ceph/wip-luminous_12.2.13_RC1/621946465d82463e8dc9e3a63fec357272e39d04/ubuntu/bionic/x86_64/flavors/default/libcephfs-java_12.2.12-640-g6219464-1bionic_all.deb
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,870: INFO/Worker-4] 
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,871: WARNING/Worker-4] Error parsing /opt/chacra/src/chacra/distributions/ceph/distributions, line 8: Unknown header 'DDebComponents'!
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,871: WARNING/Worker-4] Use --ignore=unknownfield to ignore unknown fields
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,871: WARNING/Worker-4] There have been errors!
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,871: WARNING/Worker-4] 
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,877: INFO/Worker-4] running command: reprepro --confdir /opt/chacra/src/chacra/distributions/ceph -b /opt/repos/ceph/wip-luminous_12.2.13_RC1/621946465d82463e8dc9e3a63fec357272e39d04/ubuntu/bionic/flavors/default -C main --ignore=wrongdistribution --ignore=wrongversion --ignore=undefinedtarget includedeb bionic /opt/binaries/ceph/wip-luminous_12.2.13_RC1/621946465d82463e8dc9e3a63fec357272e39d04/ubuntu/bionic/x86_64/flavors/default/librgw2_12.2.12-640-g6219464-1bionic_amd64.deb
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,906: INFO/Worker-4] 
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,907: WARNING/Worker-4] Error parsing /opt/chacra/src/chacra/distributions/ceph/distributions, line 8: Unknown header 'DDebComponents'!
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,907: WARNING/Worker-4] Use --ignore=unknownfield to ignore unknown fields
[2019-10-31 00:44:11,907: WARNING/Worker-4] There have been errors!

...etc.
dmick commented 4 years ago

The issue is, I assume, that the build hosts don't have late enough reprepro binaries? Did someone check into this before merging https://github.com/ceph/chacra/pull/267?

alfredodeza commented 4 years ago

There aren't any newer reprepro binaries, because @tchaikov is using features in a forked version of reprepro. Can we just revert this?

Steps 2 and 4 from this comment never happened: https://github.com/ceph/ceph-build/pull/1367#issuecomment-522393725