[rhcos-4.16] tests/kola: use FCOS defined fedora-archive.repo to set up containers

[marmijo]

This is a backport of: #3061

• 4853041 (tests/ntp: use the FCOS defined fedora.repo to set up container)
• b9f3487 (tests/podman/rootless-systemd: use the FCOS defined fedora.repo to set up container)

There are two tests that use the fedora container to set up and run the test environment. Use the fedora.repo file defined in fedora-coreos-config to set up that container. This will force packages to be downloaded from dl.fedoraproject.org, as specified in the FCOS file. The ITUP cluster, being used by the RHCOS pipeline, requires all outbound connections to be specified in a Firewall Egress file, and this will ensure the same connection will always be used.

---

This is also a backport of #3146

The fedora-archive.repo file now contains both EOL and non-EOL repo locations[1]. This means we can change the two kola tests that use the fedora container to use fedora-archive.repo as the only repo configuration file. This reduces the maintenance burden because now we don't have to change this curl statement when fedora versions reach EOL.

[dustymabe]

We should consider populating the archive repo here now as well.. I think it will just ignore it since no repo actually exists in those locations, but it future proofs us from having to add it later.

If it does work we should update the files in the testing-devel branch and add that change to the backport here for 4.15 and 4.16.

[marmijo]

We should consider populating the archive repo here now as well.. I think it will just ignore it since no repo actually exists in those locations, but it future proofs us from having to add it later.

I tested this in the ITUP cluster and dnf failed because the repo metadata does not exist in the archive location for F40. I was able to get it to work by setting skip_if_unavailable=True in fedora-archive.repo, but we'd have to do that for fedora.repo as well to avoid that issue when F40 content is archived, and I'm sure that has broader implications.

[dustymabe]

but we'd have to do that for fedora.repo as well

I think I'd be fine with that since we already define our own fedora.repo. cc @jlebon

i.e. I don't think there should be a case where neither of them are available.

[jlebon]

Instead of skip_if_unavailable, we can also set multiple baseurls instead. See e.g.

fedora-coreos-config/fedora.repo

Lines 6 to 7 in 2e10ea8

	baseurl=https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/
	https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/

.

The advantage of this is that it succeeds if at least one of the two is valid, otherwise it fails. skip_if_unavailable in general in CI systems is not great because it means that you can get non-deterministic results.

Edit: to clarify, what I'm suggesting here is to have the baseurls in the fedora-archive.repo be e.g.:

baseurl=https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/
        https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/
        https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/
        https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora-secondary/releases/$releasever/Everything/$basearch/os/

[marmijo]

Edit: to clarify, what I'm suggesting here is to have the baseurls in the fedora-archive.repo be e.g.:

So in that case, we would only use fedora-archive.repo for the two kola tests and the extensions container (and any other future use of the fedora container)? Otherwise we'd still hit the issue where, once e.g. F40 content is archived, then dnf will fail on fedora.repo.

[marmijo]

I opened #3145 to handle that.

[marmijo]

/hold
I'll rework this PR to include #3146, which resulted from #3145

[marmijo]

/unhold
this is ready for review

[dustymabe]

LGTM