[GSOC23] - C - Implement a StAX parser for OVAL files

[HoussemNasri]

What does this PR change?

Introduce a StAX parser (instead of the current JAXB parser) for OVAL files to increase memory efficiency when parsing large OVAL files.

Useful Links

• The RFC

GUI diff

No difference.

Before:

After:

• DONE

Documentation

• No documentation needed: add explanation. This can't be used if there is a GUI diff

• No documentation needed: only internal and user invisible changes

• Documentation issue was created: Link for SUSE Manager contributors, Link for community contributors.

• API documentation added: please review the Wiki page Writing Documentation for the API if you have any changes to API documentation.

• (OPTIONAL) Documentation PR

• DONE

Test coverage

• No tests: add explanation

• No tests: already covered

• Unit tests were added

• Cucumber tests were added

• DONE

Links

Fixes #
Tracks # add downstream PR, if any

• DONE

Changelogs

Make sure the changelogs entries you are adding are compliant with https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#changelogs and https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#uyuni-projectuyuni-repository

If you don't need a changelog check, please mark this checkbox:

• No changelog needed

If you uncheck the checkbox after the PR is created, you will need to re-run changelog_test (see below)

Re-run a test

If you need to re-run a test, please mark the related checkbox, it will be unchecked automatically once it has re-run:

• Re-run test "changelog_test"
• Re-run test "backend_unittests_pgsql"
• Re-run test "java_pgsql_tests"
• Re-run test "schema_migration_test_pgsql"
• Re-run test "susemanager_unittests"
• Re-run test "javascript_lint"
• Re-run test "spacecmd_unittests"

[github-actions]

Suggested tests to cover this Pull Request

• srv_docker_cve_audit
• min_cve_audit

[github-actions]

👋 Hello! Thanks for contributing to our project.
Acceptance tests will take some time (aprox. 1h), please be patient ☕

You can see the progress at the end of this page and at https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/pull/7510/checks
Once tests finish, if they fail, you can check 👀 the cucumber report. See the link at the output of the action.
You can also check the artifacts section, which contains the logs at https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/pull/7510/checks.

If you are unsure the failing tests are related to your code, you can check the "reference jobs". These are jobs that run on a scheduled time with code from master. If they fail for the same reason as your build, it means the tests or the infrastructure are broken. If they do not fail, but yours do, it means it is related to your code.

Reference tests:

• https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/actions/workflows/acceptance_tests_secondary_parallel.yml?query=event%3Aschedule

• https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/actions/workflows/acceptance_tests_secondary.yml?query=event%3Aschedule

KNOWN ISSUES

Sometimes the build can fail when pulling new jar files from download.opensuse.org . This is a known limitation. Given this happens rarely, when it does, all you need to do is rerun the test. Sorry for the inconvenience.

For more tips on troubleshooting, see the troubleshooting guide.

Happy hacking!
⚠️ You should not merge if acceptance tests fail to pass. ⚠️

[github-actions]

This PR is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 10 days.

[github-actions]

This PR was closed because it has been stalled for 10 days with no activity.

[mcalmer]

@HoussemNasri @parlt91 i think this is still needed, right?

[HoussemNasri]

@HoussemNasri @parlt91 i think this is still needed, right?

Yes, the A and B pull requests need to be reviewed first before we can move to this one in case there was some changes that would affect this one (all PRs are kind of stacked on each other). Right now, pr A is under review.

[mcalmer]

Than we better reopen this request

[parlt91]

Your PR looks mostly good to me now. Before we merge could you:

1. Look at failing SonarCloud tests
2. Look into the comment I left in gitter earlier about replacing stax-api-1. Can you check if it can be replaced by stax2-api provided by org/codehaus/stax2 without to much effort?

[HoussemNasri]

Look at failing SonarCloud tests

Done.

Look into the comment I left in gitter earlier about replacing stax-api-1. Can you check if it can be replaced by stax2-api provided by org/codehaus/stax2 without to much effort?

We still use some javax.xml classes in OVALParser, not sure how to get rid of them or if it's possible.

[admd]

Look at failing SonarCloud tests

Done.

Look into the comment I left in gitter earlier about replacing stax-api-1. Can you check if it can be replaced by stax2-api provided by org/codehaus/stax2 without to much effort?

We still use some javax.xml classes in OVALParser, not sure how to get rid of them or if it's possible.

@HoussemNasri I don't think the idea is to replace all javax.xml classes. Some of them belongs to JAXB and other java XML APIs which we are still keeping it. We are only interested in not having javax.xml.stream.*` classes which belong to stax-api-1.0.1. I see you are already using now stax2-api in ovalParser at some places and only few classes are left from stax-api-1.0.1 which needs to be replaced with corresponding classes from stax2-api.

@parlt91 please correct me if I say something wrong here.