ci: Add Packit configuration for RPM builds on PRs #1159
Conversation
Unconditionally define the various *_in_files, so that they appear in `make dist` tarballs independent of the configure options (in particular, `--disable-daemon`).
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
Configure with minimal options, so that we can build a dist tarball without too many extra dependencies. In particular, we want to avoid libblockdev, as we usually need the latest upstream master one, not the distro package.
|
@vojtechtrefny Does that supersede https://github.com/storaged-project/udisks/blob/master/.github/workflows/rpmbuild.yml ? Does any test CI job download/use that? AFAICS it only uploads the build log as an artifact, not the actual rpm. What do the integration tests use? Could they pull it from the packit COPR, or should there be a persistent COPR for their benefit, or do they rebuild the rpm again? |
martinpitt
force-pushed
the
master_packit
branch
from
eb91159
to
4d72ed3
Compare
Yes, this can be removed now.
We are using the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you! @tbzatek should look at the build system changes, but the packit configuration looks good to me.
|
Ah, so the CI runners only test landed PRs, not the code in the PR?
Want me to do this in this PR, or do you want to clean this up in a follow-up?
Are you going to set this up, or want me to here? Cheers! |
The tests on the PR run only against the compiled code (both dbus tests and integration tests do that). But we use the daily builds Copr repo when testing our other projects that depend on udisks.
I'll do a follow up PR after we merge this. |
martinpitt
changed the title
|
Jenkins, ok to test. |
| - './autogen.sh --disable-modules --disable-daemon' | ||
| # FIXME: just calling `make dist` doesn't build udisks/libudisks2.la for gtk-doc | ||
| - 'make' | ||
| - 'make dist' | ||
| - 'bash -c "ls *.tar*"' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So first I thought making a tarball from git sources directly and calling autogen.sh within the spec file might be a cleaner way, however then I realized the spec file wouldn't work against proper dist tarball as there's no autogen.sh then. Sure, a bunch of if-else stuff might do the trick but it's not a clean way either.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I thought the same -- it's quite nice to be able to build a package straight from a git archive tarball, without autoconfiscation. But indeed that then wouldn't have ./configure, Makefile.in, etc.
Configure with minimal options, so that we can build a dist tarball without too many extra dependencies. In particular, we want to avoid libblockdev, as we usually need the latest upstream master one, not the distro package.
This is a fixed replacement of PR #1080. I got a successful build on my fork PR.
Note that this currently uses the default transient packit COPR to build the packages. I would strongly recommend to use them, unless you have a good reason to use your custom one.
If you want "daily builds" done by packit, this needs to happen in a
trigger: commit(on master branch) job. These are different from thistrigger: pull_requestbuilds, which are done from the proposed forks/branches. They should not land in the user-facing COPR that "daily" is. It should be fairly obvious how to set these up, but if you want me to, I'm happy to send a follow-up PR which sets this up.