Thursday, 15 February 2018

Re: autopkgtest-build-lxd failing with bionic

On 15.02.2018 18:04, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 04:10:01PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> Hello Timo,
>>
>> Timo Aaltonen [2018-02-15 16:50 +0200]:
>>> On 14.02.2018 22:03, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I am on bionic and managed to build bionic container for testing using:
>>>>
>>>> $ autopkgtest-build-lxd ubuntu-daily:bionic/amd64
>>>>
>>>> Note this uses Ubuntu Foundations provided container as the base,
>>>> rather than the third-party image that you are using from "images"
>>>> remote.
>>>>
>>>> Why are you using images: remote?
>>>
>>> Because that's what the manpage suggests :)
>>
>> Right, and quite deliberately. At least back in "my days", the ubuntu: and
>> ubuntu-daily: images had a lot of fat in them which made them both
>> unnecessarily slow (extra download time, requires more RAM/disk, etc.) and also
>> undesirable for test correctness, as having all of the unnecessary bits
>> preinstalled easily hides missing dependencies.
>>
>> The latter can be alleviated by purging stuff of course, and that's what
>> happens for the cloud VM images in OpenStack:
>>
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/autopkgtest/autopkgtest.git/tree/setup-commands/setup-testbed#n242
>>
>> But this takes even more time, and so far just hasn't been necessary as the
>> images: ones were just right - they contain exactly what a generic container
>> image is supposed to contain and are pleasantly small and fast.
>>
>>>> Is the failure reproducible with ubuntu-daily:bionic?
>>>>
>>>> If you can build images with ubuntu-daily:bionic, then you need to
>>>> contact and file an issue with images: remote provider.
>>>
>>> ubuntu-daily: works, images: fails for artful and bionic while xenial
>>> works, and the image server is:
>>>
>>> https://images.linuxcontainers.org/
>>
>> These are being advertised and used a lot, so maybe Stephane's LXD team can
>> help with fixing these? Them having no network at all sounds like a grave bug
>> which should be fixed either way.
>
> That's not what's going on at all. They do have working networking, but the
> network does not come up fast enough. The apt update is not retried because
> it exits with 0 because all it sees are transient errors.

True, I added a 'sleep 10' in front of the apt-get update line, and now
it works..

filed a bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/autopkgtest/+bug/1749736


--
t

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel