Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
#20528 closed enhancement (fixed)
upgrade patchbot to 2.5.7
Reported by: | chapoton | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-7.2 |
Component: | packages: optional | Keywords: | |
Cc: | jdemeyer, vdelecroix, embray | Merged in: | |
Authors: | Frédéric Chapoton | Reviewers: | Jeroen Demeyer |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | e5a230d (Commits, GitHub, GitLab) | Commit: | e5a230d0395754fcbfd5afa2917198dbbea22b23 |
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
with a better treatment of startup modules
also correcting a detail about owner option
and no longer using os.getcwd()
Tarball: http://www-irma.u-strasbg.fr/~chapoton/patchbot-2.5.7.tar.bz2
Change History (35)
comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by
Branch: | → public/20528 |
---|---|
Commit: | → 66cacb81e26e5a4ebfc1e4ad181c5dd9fcb6707c |
Status: | new → needs_review |
comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by
Cc: | jdemeyer vdelecroix embray added |
---|
comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by
Status: | needs_review → needs_work |
---|
Found local metadata for patchbot-2.5.6 Invalid checksum for cached file /home/worker/sage-patchbot/upstream/patchbot-2.5.6.tar.bz2, deleting
comment:5 Changed 7 years ago by
I am not currently able to upload files to the place where I usually store my patchbot tars. So I cannot do anything for that ticket right now, sorry.
comment:6 Changed 7 years ago by
Commit: | 66cacb81e26e5a4ebfc1e4ad181c5dd9fcb6707c → 0b9787026bfd07d7fb7c9754804eb1a8b2282278 |
---|
comment:7 Changed 7 years ago by
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|---|
Status: | needs_work → needs_review |
ok, here is a corrected and working branch, with the tar.bz2 put on my website
comment:8 Changed 7 years ago by
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:11 Changed 7 years ago by
The patchbot on arando is stuck on
[2016-05-12 09:40:11] The following tickets will be skipped: #15590 (until 1463039060.99) [2016-05-12 09:40:11] Check base. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py", line 1432, in main if not patchbot.check_base(): File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py", line 689, in check_base cwd = os.getcwd() OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory
comment:12 follow-up: 13 Changed 7 years ago by
Hmm, this could be caused by a directory being removed, or by a filesystem problem. In which dir are you when launching the patchbot ? Have you removed this dir ?
I could wrap that with a try except
clause. But I am using the variable cwd
to get back to the original directory at the end of the function (by using os.chdir(cwd)). This is because I need to be in the sage_root directory when performing git operations.
EDIT: or maybe I could try to use os.getenv('PWD')
instead ?
comment:13 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
Hmm, this could be caused by a directory being removed, or by a filesystem problem. In which dir are you when launching the patchbot ?
/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot
Have you removed this dir ?
No.
But I am using the variable cwd to get back to the original directory
Is this really needed? I don't know the code exactly, but why can't you just chdir()
to SAGE_ROOT
and stay there?
If you really need to go back to the potentially-removed directory, you should use os.fchdir()
instead of os.chdir()
which will work even on deleted or moved directories.
comment:14 Changed 7 years ago by
Commit: | 0b9787026bfd07d7fb7c9754804eb1a8b2282278 → e5a230d0395754fcbfd5afa2917198dbbea22b23 |
---|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
e5a230d | patchbot 2.5.7, without using os.getcwd()
|
comment:15 Changed 7 years ago by
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|---|
Summary: | upgrade patchbot to 2.5.6 → upgrade patchbot to 2.5.7 |
here is a new version not using os.getcwd, simply changing dir to sage root
comment:16 Changed 7 years ago by
I will test the new version on arando and sage4
Question (unrelated to this ticket): do you think that the patchbot should also test all optional packages with doctests? It might be a good idea to do that, to run all # optional
tests depending on optional packages.
comment:17 Changed 7 years ago by
I saw this in the patchbot log while handling ticket #0. I don't know how serious it is.
Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py", line 1280, in report_ticket report['owner'] = self.owner AttributeError: 'Patchbot' object has no attribute 'owner'
comment:18 Changed 7 years ago by
This has been solved in patchbot >= 2.5.6.
For which version of the bot do you see that ?
comment:19 follow-up: 22 Changed 7 years ago by
It seems that the patchbot auto-downgrades itself to 2.5.5. Is this the normal behaviour ? I know that we auto-upgrade optional packages.. Anyway, this should not be a problem, once the patchbot is launched and running smoothly. But everytime you stop it, in this testing phase, you must be careful to re-install the latest version before re-launching.
comment:20 follow-up: 21 Changed 7 years ago by
Concerning the optional doctests in general, I do not quite understand what is the status currently. Looking at the log
one sees the lines
Using --optional=4ti2,benzene,bliss,buckygen,cbc,ccache,coxeter3,csdp,database_cremona_ellcurve,database_gap,database_jones_numfield,database_mutation_class,database_odlyzko_zeta,database_pari,database_stein_watkins,database_symbolic_data,dot2tex,gambit,gap_packages,gdb,giac,giacpy,lrslib,mcqd,meataxe,modular_decomposition,mpir,patchbot,plantri,python2,qepcad,saclib,sage,tdlib,tides,topcom Doctesting entire Sage library.
So it seems that indeed all optional things are tested. But maybe you did something special to achieve that ?
See also #20604 for fixing the optional doctest failing with coxeter3.
comment:21 Changed 7 years ago by
comment:22 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
I know that we auto-upgrade optional packages..
And we also auto-upgrade optional packages which have been "downgraded". I now installed 2.5.7 again on arando.
comment:23 Changed 7 years ago by
So far, things are looking good. I suggest to leave the bots running for a few more days and then set this to positive review.
comment:24 follow-ups: 25 26 Changed 7 years ago by
Well, arando is still not happy with TOPCOM, for some reason.
see http://patchbot.sagemath.org/ticket/0/
By the way, I have started to try making the patchbot a correct python package. I would appreciate any help to do that. There is a branch here:
comment:25 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
Well, arando is still not happy with TOPCOM, for some reason.
Really? But then why does it continue to run anyway, if there is a problem with ticket 0?
comment:26 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
By the way, I have started to try making the patchbot a correct python package.
Did you look at the instructions on https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/distributing/
comment:27 follow-ups: 28 29 Changed 7 years ago by
- concerning arando, it should have stopped after failing on 0, unless you specified the option "skip_base=True". This being said, it does not meet on other tickets the failing doctest that we can see on ticket 0.
- concerning the packaging, yes, I read that and did my best, but this is nevertheless my first try. And this change probably also require changing the inner gears of sage --patchbot"
comment:28 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
- concerning arando, it should have stopped after failing on 0, unless you specified the option "skip_base=True".
I don't think that I specified "skip_base=True"
, because I remember it breaking on other errors before (like the coxeter3
failure).
However, it seems that this test of ticket 0 was not the initial test, but some later test (maybe because a new release came out?). It seems that these later tests of ticket 0 do not cause the patchbot to abort.
comment:29 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
- concerning the packaging, yes, I read that and did my best, but this is nevertheless my first try.
I think it's best if you try to get started and then see if and where you get stuck.
comment:30 Changed 7 years ago by
Question: which tickets does the patchbot test? Only those which needs_review, or also positive_review or needs_info...?
comment:31 follow-up: 32 Changed 7 years ago by
In principle all of them, but there is a priority given to "needs_review", I think. The problem is that we are currently seriously lacking running patchbots. Only poseidon is running, with a quite old but stable version of the bot. I do not know what happened to the other bots.
EDIT:
default_bonus = {"needs_review": 1000, "positive_review": 500,"blocker": 100,"critical": 60,"major": 10,"unique": 40,"applies": 20,"behind": 1}
comment:32 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to chapoton:
The problem is that we are currently seriously lacking running patchbots.
It doesn't look so bad to me.
Only poseidon is running
What about sage4
? And I noticed that arando
indeed went down, I'm restarting it now.
comment:33 Changed 7 years ago by
Maybe this could be considered as ready to go, no ?
I plan to work on "patchbot as a correct python pkg" after this is closed.
comment:34 Changed 7 years ago by
Reviewers: | → Jeroen Demeyer |
---|---|
Status: | needs_review → positive_review |
comment:35 Changed 7 years ago by
Branch: | public/20528 → e5a230d0395754fcbfd5afa2917198dbbea22b23 |
---|---|
Resolution: | → fixed |
Status: | positive_review → closed |
New commits:
update patchbot to 2.5.6