!UNVBThoJtlIiVwiDjU:nixos.org

Staging

352 Members
Staging merges | Find currently open staging-next PRs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pulls?q=is%3Apr+sort%3Aupdated-desc+head%3Astaging-next+head%3Astaging-next-21.05+is%3Aopen115 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
1 Sep 2021
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát
In reply to @andi:kack.it
I looked at the machines dashboard of hydra and there were ~4 x86_64-linux machines for about 30min that didn't execute a single job
Maybe they're stuck. We certainly have some macs that haven't made a step for days.
11:59:41
@hexa:lossy.networkhexait really seemed like the x86_64-linux machines were idle yesterday, I often saw no x86_64-linux jobs in the running builds12:11:04
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát Weird. I noticed that the /machines page isn't very precise, e.g. it seemed not to show jobs that take relatively short time... for this the /queue-runner-status seemed better. 12:22:57
@hexa:lossy.networkhexathe machine page also shows machines as idle when they're copying stuff12:31:55
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát Well, the scheduling certainly isn't ideal. Now I looked at t4b, and it's been completely idle during the last 15 minutes, not even I/O waits. 12:44:47
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát * Well, the scheduling certainly isn't ideal. Now I looked at t4b, and it's been completely idle during the last 15 minutes, not even I/O waits. (I ran atop on it) 12:45:14
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát The runner status says: "currentJobs" : 4 :-) 12:46:13
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa Vladimír Čunát: hm, what was you reasoning behind merging staging-next-21.05? 20:51:24
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátGetting updated 21.05-small.20:52:14
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát(I tried explaining in the commit message)20:52:30
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátAnd missing binaries on a release branch seem less hurtful than on master.20:53:06
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaGitHub isn't very forthcoming with the merge commit's message20:53:13
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaat least not from within the pull request20:53:38
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaFWIW: I don't mind, was just wondering because there was >50k jobs left20:54:01
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátAh, right... there's a PR :-)20:55:16
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaah, you merged from the CLI? :P20:56:23
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátYes, I typically merge from CLI. (and sign them)20:56:51
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátThe original motivation of -small channels was for faster delivery of security updates. Staging them (partially) defeats that.20:58:12
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátActually, aarch64-linux has no more runnables in queue ATM, if I look right.21:34:02
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátSo this will put it back to work.21:34:08
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát * So this will put it back to work. (ah, probably not too much, just some NixOS tests will get added)21:38:43
3 Sep 2021
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát
In reply to @andi:kack.it
I'm currently testing the PR rebased on master (with a hydra jobset) so ideally the amount of (additional) rebuilds will be very small anyway.

I don't expect the systemd jobset really helps to reduce the rebuilds much. It's small - only has about one thousand builds, but OfBorg says the full rebuild amount is >26k.

Also, I assume you didn't mean for systemd to go before the staging-next iteration that's been in progress for more than a week (?), and their combination will cause rebuilds again.

05:59:17
@andi:kack.itandi-It isn't about rebuilds but getting the testes executed. Also to be able to verify on local devices without days of rebuilding things locally. I don't expect it to merge apart from any of the usual staging flows.06:00:43
@andi:kack.itandi-* It isn't about rebuilds but getting the testes executed. Also to be able to verify on local devices without days of rebuilding things locally. I don't expect it to be merged outside of any of the usual staging flows.06:02:56
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír ČunátAh, so it just waits if there's more feedback and then will get merged to staging? Even staging-next would seem OK at this moment, given that you've tested it relatively a lot and it staging-next doesn't have that many binaries ATM (and x86_64-darwin is lagging way behind and won't suffer from systemd).06:04:48
@vcunat:matrix.orgVladimír Čunát * Ah, so it just waits if there's more feedback and then will get merged to staging? Even staging-next would seem OK at this moment, given that you've tested it relatively a lot and staging-next doesn't have that many binaries ATM (and x86_64-darwin is lagging way behind and won't suffer from systemd).06:05:18
@andi:kack.itandi-Yeah, I don't think it is very risky right now. There is one minor change pending and then it is good to go. I'll have a look at that in the evening. By then all the pending tests are hopefully through.06:07:21
4 Sep 2021
@andi:kack.itandi-FWIW I think the PR is "final". I've gone through most of the hydra build failures and I couldn't find anything that would come from my changes. Retargeted the PR to staging-next so we can merge it in whenever you want.16:33:46
5 Sep 2021
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa
Your branch is ahead of 'origin/staging-next' by 485 commits.
12:52:07
@lukegb:zxcvbnm.ninjalukegb (he/him) joined the room.12:52:29

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6