This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 17, 2024. It is now read-only.
work for issue #379 - adding back rpm and deb tests #439
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
EricDavisX
added
enhancement
|
@mdelapenya when I run Centos, it works super. But when I run Debian, it throws an error and I can't trace the logging or the go code itself to be sure. I could use help, please. The error cited in the logs looks to relate exactly to the error we were attempting to fix in the cited issue above. perhaps it is just not fixed yet? But also, perhaps, our code needs some modification. I'd like to clarify what it is intending tho... we use a Debian image, with systemd - but the scripting indicates it is using some sysv init usage so, I'm not sure what is going on. This one line is particularly confusing from the logging below: |
💔 Tests Failed
Expand to view the summary
Build stats
Test stats 🧪
Test errors
Expand to view the tests failures
|
| Test | Results |
|---|---|
| Failed | 1 |
| Passed | 42 |
| Skipped | 20 |
| Total | 63 |
Genuine test errors 
💔 There are test failures but not known flaky tests, most likely a genuine test failure.
- Name:
Initializing / End-To-End Tests / helm_apm-server / The APM Server chart will create recommended K8S resources – APM Server
EricDavisX
commented
Nov 18, 2020
| @@ -15,6 +15,19 @@ Examples: | |||
| | centos | tar | | |||
| | debian | tar | | |||
|
|
|||
| @enroll | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FYI - I wanted to keep this separate from the above 'install' step due to the underlying sub-command tested. it would be a different failure if this broke but the other did not.
|
/package |
|
I don't know how to re-trigger tests apart from going into Jenkins and logging in and doing a re-build. that isn't too bad tho, but it is interesting that subsequent PR pushes don't auto retrigger - might be good to put that in, else it keeps us on the honor system which unintentionally may fail us. I pushed a new change and it didn't re-trigger which is what made me think of it. Perhaps we could support something like /git-bot test this please? Also - I have no idea why a pre-submit test is failing, help?
|
|
About the pre-submit errors, they are related to gherkin lint. Could you fix this line? From: When the "elastic-agent" process is "restarted" on the host
And the "filebeat" process is in the "started" state on the hostTo: When the "elastic-agent" process is "restarted" on the host
Then the "filebeat" process is in the "started" state on the host
|
|
To run the tests with a GH comment, you can check: https://github.com/elastic/e2e-testing/blob/master/.ci/Jenkinsfile#L27 |
kuisathaverat
added
[zube]: In Review
[zube]: In Progress
and removed
[zube]: In Review
labels
|
@mdelapenya its ready for review, but I had to feel-out how the linter would react. Can you help point me to the linting guidelines I can read thru? |
mdelapenya
suggested changes
Nov 20, 2020
|
should be all good to go now, if not, we can review what failed (test or lint!) |
mdelapenya
approved these changes
Dec 1, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @EricDavisX this LGTM! Great job with the Gherkin sequencing! Let's see how it goes with test failures and flakiness before merging this.
Let's also discuss (maybe in another issue) if we move the systemd-specific scenario to a separate feature file, not added to the CI parallel branches.
|
Hi, I've pushed up latest changes which:
here is evidence of my validating the skip works: without the skip: source file for test ref: Manu this also closes the 'skip' support request as logged in: |
8 tasks
EricDavisX
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2020
This reverts commit a30e1f4.
This was referenced Dec 2, 2020
mdelapenya
added a commit
to mdelapenya/e2e-testing
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2020
* adding back rpm and deb tests * arbitrary change to trigger ci tests * fix linting * fixing more linting * fully exploring gherkin linting apparently * final linting fix * updating ci suites to match new tags * reset indention w feedback passes linting locally * adding skip support and skipping rpm and deb tests * back to fixing linting for tags now Co-authored-by: Manuel de la Peña <mdelapenya@gmail.com>
mdelapenya
added a commit
to mdelapenya/e2e-testing
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2020
* adding back rpm and deb tests * arbitrary change to trigger ci tests * fix linting * fixing more linting * fully exploring gherkin linting apparently * final linting fix * updating ci suites to match new tags * reset indention w feedback passes linting locally * adding skip support and skipping rpm and deb tests * back to fixing linting for tags now Co-authored-by: Manuel de la Peña <mdelapenya@gmail.com>
mdelapenya
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2020
* work for issue #379 - adding back rpm and deb tests (#439) * adding back rpm and deb tests * arbitrary change to trigger ci tests * fix linting * fixing more linting * fully exploring gherkin linting apparently * final linting fix * updating ci suites to match new tags * reset indention w feedback passes linting locally * adding skip support and skipping rpm and deb tests * back to fixing linting for tags now Co-authored-by: Manuel de la Peña <mdelapenya@gmail.com> * fix: use proper gherkin comments (#519) Co-authored-by: Eric Davis <eric.davis@elastic.co>
mdelapenya
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2020
* work for issue #379 - adding back rpm and deb tests (#439) * adding back rpm and deb tests * arbitrary change to trigger ci tests * fix linting * fixing more linting * fully exploring gherkin linting apparently * final linting fix * updating ci suites to match new tags * reset indention w feedback passes linting locally * adding skip support and skipping rpm and deb tests * back to fixing linting for tags now Co-authored-by: Manuel de la Peña <mdelapenya@gmail.com> * fix: use proper gherkin comments (#519) Co-authored-by: Eric Davis <eric.davis@elastic.co>
9 tasks
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
2 things:
very small change to rename the @ tag to be more accurate per the tests being done and to sync 2 file names to the @ tag name for the whole file (I think this is our best practice pattern?)
most primarily, this is work for [Fleet] Add back test scenarios for .deb and .rpm systemd deploy syntax #379 - adding in the deb and rpm tests against centos & debian images that were removed prior.
I used existing .go implementation code that remained and which I think is functional and updated so far, only feature files.
Why is it important?
we need coverage over rpm and deb installs, even tho they are no longer the recommended usage - they are still supported and expected to be used.
In 379 you can see the discussion, we removed this accidentally / temporarily as we implemented new support for 'install' feature.
Checklist
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation- [ ] I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works- [ ] I have run the Unit tests for the CLI, and they are passing locally- [ ] I have noticed new Go dependencies (runmake noticein the proper directory)Author's Checklist
I actually am opening this as a draft to get some help from @mdelapenya or perhaps @blakerouse if we need
How to test this PR locally
OP_LOG_LEVEL=DEBUG DEVELOPER_MODE=true godog -t enroll > test-debug.log
Related issues
Follow-ups
So, Centos is working as submitted here, But Debian is throwing an error.. and I am not 100% sure I'm tracing the go code we've implemented right to know what question to ask. I'll put logs and more details in the comments and we can figure it out I hope.