autoqa cannot work with i386 architecture
by Hongqing Yang
Dear All,
Now I am developing the URL and DVD automatic installation test, I try to integrate them into AutoQA.
but the architecture cannot be parsed correctly.
in the master branch, we can try it as below:
autoqa post-tree-compose http://download.englab.nay.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/14/Fedora... --arch=i386 --test=rats_install --local
it always parsed the architecture as x86_64
I find the following codes are in the parse_params function of autoqa:
# Run the tests locally, or schedule them through autotest?
run_local = (opts.local or getbool(conf['local']))
if not opts.arch or run_local:
opts.arch = ['noarch']
can you help me make clear why we set arch as 'noarch' when we run it locally, thanks.
Hongqing
12 years, 11 months
Re: [AutoQA] #319: Create HTML log output if possible
by fedora-badges
#319: Create HTML log output if possible
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner: vhumpa
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0
Component: core | Resolution:
Keywords: |
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Comment (by vhumpa):
I've added a method that returns a plain text overview for the e-mails, so
that you guys (Kamil) can make use of it on Monday: origin->pretty
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/319#comment:5>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
Testing HTML email
by Josef Skladanka
AutoQA Upgradepath Test Results
ID gcal-3.6-3.fc15
Result PASSED
Koji tag dist-f15-updates-pending
Architecture all
Test ended 2011-05-27 09:27:05 UTC
Full log http:///results/None/upgradepath/results/full.log Summary: 1 PASSED
PASSED:
gcal-3.6-3.fc15
Detailed Results
============================================================
gcal-3.6-3.fc15 into dist-f15-updates
============================================================
[ OK ] dist-f13
No such package: gcal
[ OK ] dist-f13-updates
No such package: gcal
[ OK ] dist-f14
No such package: gcal
[ OK ] dist-f14-updates
No such package: gcal
[ OK ] dist-f15
No such package: gcal
[ OK ] dist-f16
Latest package: gcal-3.6-3.fc16
RESULT: PASSED
Additional Information
• For guidance on resolving failures detected by upgradepath, consult: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_tests/Upgradepath
• For more information on AutoQA, consult: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA
12 years, 11 months
Re: [AutoQA] #319: Create HTML log output if possible
by fedora-badges
#319: Create HTML log output if possible
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner: vhumpa
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0
Component: core | Resolution:
Keywords: |
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Comment (by vhumpa):
Replying to [comment:3 vhumpa]:
> I changed the PrettyLog and related items to use the HTML now, including
support for highlighting on terms as we negotiated with Joza. Check
origin/pretty for the changes.
>
> Highlights go as an extra parameter, which should be a list of pairs of
strings.
> Example is commented in the pretty_log code - basically the pair should
contains
> ('text to highlight', 'Comment').
>
> I realize there is TestOutput.highlights that could be used for the
purpose, doesn't support for comments yet though. We can change it to do
so though - or we can keep things separate.
> Here is an example of one current upgrade path test (highlighting makes
no there of course), styling might still need some work.
>
> http://vhumpa.fedorapeople.org/gnome-gmail-1.7.2-2.html
Honestly, I am sorry for all the typos and English there^
Just a memo now: I've also modified TestOutput to use proper file
extensions for full and pretty_logs.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/319#comment:4>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
Re: [AutoQA] #319: Create HTML log output if possible
by fedora-badges
#319: Create HTML log output if possible
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner: vhumpa
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0
Component: core | Resolution:
Keywords: |
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Comment (by vhumpa):
I changed the PrettyLog and related items to use the HTML now, including
support for highlighting on terms as we negotiated with Joza. Check
origin/pretty for the changes.
Highlights go as an extra parameter, which should be a list of pairs of
strings.
Example is commented in the pretty_log code - basically the pair should
contains
('text to highlight', 'Comment').
I realize there is TestOutput.highlights that could be used for the
purpose, doesn't support for comments yet though. We can change it to do
so though - or we can keep things separate.
Here is an example of one current upgrade path test (highlighting makes no
there of course), styling might still need some work.
http://vhumpa.fedorapeople.org/gnome-gmail-1.7.2-2.html
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/319#comment:3>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
Re: [AutoQA] #319: Create HTML log output if possible
by fedora-badges
#319: Create HTML log output if possible
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner: vhumpa
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0
Component: core | Resolution:
Keywords: |
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Comment (by vhumpa):
We're thinking here to go with the HTML after all as the highlights (while
not essential) will be a useful feature. I am rewriting the PrettyLog once
again to produce a html output, that will also enable for both summarizing
highlighted lines on top of the "Detailed Results" section as well linking
them to the line in question from there. Joza requested also a way of
having a commentary there and I am thinking of putting it next to a
highlighted line - or in the top highlights section, per request.
http://vhumpa.fedorapeople.org/log_example.html
This is a rough example of how an upgradepath log could look like
(although the highlight feature is targeted to depcheck of course, so it
is not a best functional example). Thanks James for his template, the
Fedora css seems appropriate. Please don't take it as any final looks
though yet.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/319#comment:2>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
Re: [AutoQA] #319: Create HTML log output if possible
by fedora-badges
#319: Create HTML log output if possible
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner: vhumpa
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0
Component: core | Resolution:
Keywords: |
--------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
Changes (by vhumpa):
* owner: => vhumpa
Comment:
We realized that we need a way of highlights for depcheck inside result
detail in pretty logs. I am uncertain on how to do that in plain text, so
it looks like that this ticket needs to be dealt with sooner than we
thought. I will investigate how to put at least some simple html into
prettylogs to enable highlighting without having to redo much of the
recent changes to the pretty_log/test.py.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/319#comment:1>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
RHEL5 in AutoQA and python 2.4 compatibility
by Tim Flink
This came up in the review of #293 and I thought that I would bring it
up on the list.
Since our AutoQA server runs RHEL5, it is also running python 2.4 which
doesn't support "finally" blocks.
What is the minimum version of python we want to support? Should all of
our code be 2.4 compatible or just the stuff that will likely run on the
autotest server ( events, watchers etc.)?
We already have several finally blocks in our tests in stable and a
couple in the libs, so breaking 2.4 compatibility wouldn't be a huge
deal in the tests since we haven't seen too many problems so far.
Thoughts?
Tim
12 years, 11 months
[AutoQA] #334: integrate url install to AutoQA
by fedora-badges
#334: integrate url install to AutoQA
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: hongqing | Owner: hongqing
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Automate installation test plan
Component: core | Keywords:
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Now url install can run locally, it's time for us to integrate to AutoQA.
we have already have post-tree-compose to accept ftp and http tree
compose.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/334>
AutoQA <http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org>
Automated QA project
12 years, 11 months
