git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[tripleo] Use Podman 1.6 in CI


Hi Luke Short,
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:40 AM Luke Short <ekultails at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey folks,
>
> Thank you for all of the feedback so far. The goal is definitely to fix this everywhere we can, no just in CI. Sorry for my poor choice of words. I will migrate this discussion over to the RDO community.
>
So iiuc the problem correctly podman 1.6.4 is needed to fix some race
issues, the corresponding bug
https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1856324 mainly referred
CentOS7 jobs/users as most of the Upstream work/development around
CentOS7 but considering efforts around CentOS8 i will try to put info
related to both wrt RDO.

With respect to CentOS8:-
So plan for master is to move to CentOS8, but CentOS8 is still not
completely ready, it's WIP. Current status and issues can be found
with [1][2]. wrt podman version, as soon as job/users start consuming
CentOS8, podman version whatever shipped with it will be available,
most likely it will be podman-1.4.2-5 looking at Stream content [5],
which might be updated with future updates/releases. I guess similar
race issue might be hitting in Train as well, so with respect to
Train, there is also plan to add CentOS8 support for Train in addition
to CentOS7 as a follow up/parallel to master efforts.

Now with respect to CentOS7:-
Current podman version we have in RDO is 1.5.1-3 for both train and
master. There was an attempt [3] in past from @Emilien Macchi to
update podman to 1.6.1 in RDO but there were some issues running on
CentOS7 and we didn't hear much from container Team on how to move
forward, we can attempt again to see if > 1.6.1 is working which
mostly depends on Container Teams plan for podman and CentOS7.
In RDO we use the builds done by Container Team and last successful
build on CBS is 1.6.2[4].

[1] https://lists.rdoproject.org/pipermail/dev/2020-January/009230.html
[2] https://trello.com/c/fv3u22df/709-centos8-move-to-centos8
[3] https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/23449/
[4] https://cbs.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6853
[5] http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/

> Sincerely,
>     Luke Short
>
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 5:55 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 2020-01-08 15:35:03 -0700 (-0700), Alex Schultz wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
>> > > On 2020-01-08 16:49:15 -0500 (-0500), Luke Short wrote:
>> > > > We have been running into a situation where an older version of
>> > > > Podman is used in CI that has consistent failures. It has problems
>> > > > deleting storage associated with a container.
>> > > [...]
>> > > > The question/ask I have is can we ship/use a newer version of
>> > > > Podman in our upstream CI? Or should we continue our efforts on
>> > > > making a workaround?
>> > > [...]
>> > >
>> > > This sounds like a problem users of your software could encounter in
>> > > production. If so, how does only fixing it in CI jobs help your
>> > > users? It seems like time might be better spent fixing the problem
>> > > for everyone.
>> >
>> > Btw fixing CI implies fixing for everyone. In other words, how do we
>> > make it available for everyone (including CI).  This is one of those
>> > ecosystem things because we (tripleo/openstack) don't necessarily ship
>> > it but we do need to use it.  I'm uncertain of the centos7/podman 1.6
>> > support and which branches are affected by this?  This might be a
>> > better question for RDO.
>>
>> I see, "ship/use a newer version of Podman in our upstream CI"
>> didn't seem to necessarily imply getting a newer version of Podman
>> into RDO/TripleO and the hands of its users. I have a bit of a
>> knee-jerk reaction whenever I see someone talk about "fixing CI"
>> when the underlying problem is in the software being tested and not
>> the CI jobs.
>> --
>> Jeremy Stanley


Thanks and Regards
Yatin Karel