Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[RHELC-1282] Override yum config exclude list #1030

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 14, 2024

Conversation

r0x0d
Copy link
Member

@r0x0d r0x0d commented Jan 11, 2024

Override the exclude list from the yum config file to avoid dependency problems during the transaction process.

This method is temporary as it will only override the config file while running the transaction, no modifications to the config file physically will be done.

Jira Issues: RHELC-1282

Checklist

  • PR has been tested manually in a VM (either author or reviewer)
  • Jira issue has been made public if possible
  • [RHELC-] is part of the PR title
  • GitHub label has been added to help with Release notes
  • PR title explains the change from the user's point of view
  • Code and tests are documented properly
  • The commits are squashed to as few commits as possible (without losing data)
  • When merged: Jira issue has been updated to Release Pending if relevant

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 11, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.36%. Comparing base (668d764) to head (41365ce).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1030   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.36%   95.36%           
=======================================
  Files          51       51           
  Lines        4596     4597    +1     
  Branches      811      811           
=======================================
+ Hits         4383     4384    +1     
  Misses        137      137           
  Partials       76       76           
Flag Coverage Δ
centos-linux-7 90.42% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
centos-linux-8 91.41% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
centos-linux-9 91.46% <0.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@r0x0d r0x0d added kind/bug-fix A bug has been fixed tests/tier0 PR ready to run the essential test suit. Equivalent to `/packit test --labels tier0`. labels Jan 11, 2024
@has-bot
Copy link
Member

has-bot commented Jan 11, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0


@oamg/conversions-qe please review results and provide ack.

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Jan 11, 2024

Suggestion from @kokesak in slack regarding integration testing this PR:

We could simply add the redhat-release-server package to the yum conf exclude list, boot into an older kernel (for example, 3.10.0-1160.95.1.el7.x86_64) and run the transaction in analysis mode. We can check explicitly for not having an occurrence of the following packages in the transaction logs:

  • grubby-8.28-26.el7.x86_64 requires system-release
  • kernel-3.10.0-1160.105.1.el7.x86_64 requires system-release
  • setup-2.8.71-11.el7.noarch requires system-release
  • initscripts-9.49.53-1.el7_9.1.x86_64 requires redhat-release

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Jan 16, 2024

This is supposed to land on 1.8.

@r0x0d r0x0d force-pushed the clean-yum-exclude-list branch 3 times, most recently from 4dddf9f to e32faf4 Compare February 26, 2024 17:48
Copy link
Contributor

@pr-watson pr-watson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me

@bookwar
Copy link
Contributor

bookwar commented Mar 5, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0

@Venefilyn
Copy link
Member

/packit test --labels tier0

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 6, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 7, 2024

/packit build

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 7, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 8, 2024

@danmyway, for some reason, the newly added tests are picking an "older" version instead of what is in the latest commit...

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 8, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0

@danmyway
Copy link
Member

@r0x0d I don't think I follow, do you have an example somewhere?

@r0x0d r0x0d force-pushed the clean-yum-exclude-list branch 2 times, most recently from adbd320 to 320b12a Compare March 11, 2024 17:07
@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 11, 2024

@r0x0d I don't think I follow, do you have an example somewhere?

Nevermind... I think I was just seeing the wrong test.

@r0x0d
Copy link
Member Author

r0x0d commented Mar 11, 2024

/packit test --labels tier0

@Venefilyn
Copy link
Member

@r0x0d can you rebase and fix conflicts?

Override the exclude list from the yum config file to avoid dependency
problems during the transaction process.

This method is temporary as it will only override the config file while
running the transaction, no modifications to the config file physically
will be done.

Signed-off-by: Rodolfo Olivieri <rolivier@redhat.com>
@Venefilyn
Copy link
Member

/packit test

@Venefilyn Venefilyn enabled auto-merge (squash) March 14, 2024 15:30
@Venefilyn Venefilyn merged commit 8fc6300 into oamg:main Mar 14, 2024
14 of 57 checks passed
@r0x0d r0x0d deleted the clean-yum-exclude-list branch March 14, 2024 15:34
@hosekadam hosekadam mentioned this pull request May 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug-fix A bug has been fixed tests/tier0 PR ready to run the essential test suit. Equivalent to `/packit test --labels tier0`.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants