-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.1k
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
tools: zlib update by checking latest commit #48054
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wrote the other script (and the comments therein) based on the Abseil Live at Head policy, which Google recommends to follow for GoogleTest. I don't think this is true for zlib.
What's the motivation behind tracking Chromium's copy of zlib instead of the official zlib repository on GitHub? And if there is a good reason to track Chromium's copy, wouldn't it make more sense to track Chromium releases (assuming they still have a somewhat reasonable release schedule) than their HEAD?
Does zlib really publish releases too infrequently? There's not a lot of activity in the repository. It's a project from 1995 and only 50 commits or so have been pushed to the official development branch over the last five years.
(However, those few bug fixes that are in the official zlib repository do not seem to get pulled into Chromium's copy.)
Performance. There's a number of improvements that upstream zlib hasn't merged (see this open upstream issue and this example upstream PR). I believe there are also other zlib forks that have supposedly implemented different performance-related changes as well but have not been merged back. |
@tniessen we are using the Chromium fork https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/third_party/zlib. They don't have a release schedule. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, it's a bit cumbersome but I cant think of a better way
@nodejs/security-wg
if [ "$NEW_VERSION" = "$CURRENT_VERSION" ]; then | ||
git stash drop | ||
|
||
if [ -z "$DIFF_TREE" ]; then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we also want to skip if we end up with echo 1
above, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We want to skip only if we don't end up with echo 1
. git diff --exit-code
exit with code 0 and no output when there's no diff. That being said, we don't gain much from the --exit-code
flag, I was suggesting it so we can use it directly as the test, but currently it doesn't give us much expect an additional line with the number 1 🤷♂️
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, my point is that if it fails we should exit, but currently even if it fails we end up with a non empty string and continue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here's how I would write it:
# Revert zconf.h changes before checking diff
perl -i -pe 's|^//#include "chromeconf.h"|#include "chromeconf.h"|' "$DEPS_DIR/zlib/zconf.h"
git stash -- "$DEPS_DIR/zlib/zconf.h"
git fetch https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/third_party/zlib.git HEAD
(\
git diff --exit-code --diff-filter=d stash@{0}:deps/zlib FETCH_HEAD -- ':!zconf.h' && \
echo "Skipped because zlib is on the latest version." && \
git stash drop && \
exit 0 \
) || git stash drop
The double git stash drop
is a bit unsettling, but I feel that's a more straightforward way of thinking about what this code is doing (but maybe that's just me).
If we don't use the --exit-code
flag:
# Revert zconf.h changes before checking diff
perl -i -pe 's|^//#include "chromeconf.h"|#include "chromeconf.h"|' "$DEPS_DIR/zlib/zconf.h"
git stash -- "$DEPS_DIR/zlib/zconf.h"
git fetch https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/third_party/zlib.git HEAD
DIFF_TREE=$(git diff --diff-filter=d stash@{0}:deps/zlib FETCH_HEAD -- ':!zconf.h')
git stash drop
if [ -z "$DIFF_TREE" ]; then
echo "Skipped because zlib is on the latest version."
exit 0
fi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Without --exit-code
seems cleaner and easier to understand to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
DIFF_TREE=$(git diff --diff-filter=d stash@{0}:deps/zlib FETCH_HEAD -- ':!zconf.h')
With this check, we didn't get the diff of other possible changes to zconf.h
I think we still need two checks. One for checking the entire lib without zconf, and one for checking only the re-patched zconf
DIFF_TREE=$(
git diff 'stash@{0}:deps/zlib' FETCH_HEAD -- zconf.h
git diff --diff-filter=d HEAD:deps/zlib FETCH_HEAD -- ':!zconf.h'
)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn’t it be DIFF_TREE=$(git diff stash@{0}:deps/zlib FETCH_HEAD)
? stash@{0}
is supposed to be exactly the same as upstream if there are no updates, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes you are right
@fasenderos can you please remove the merge commit? Thank you. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM once conflicts are resolved.
Commit Queue failed- Loading data for nodejs/node/pull/48054 ✔ Done loading data for nodejs/node/pull/48054 ----------------------------------- PR info ------------------------------------ Title tools: zlib update by checking latest commit (#48054) ⚠ Could not retrieve the email or name of the PR author's from user's GitHub profile! Branch fasenderos:zlib-update -> nodejs:main Labels tools, commit-queue-squash Commits 12 - tools: zlib update by checking latest commit - tools: update zlib with a delay of 2 days - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh - tools: exclude deleted files from checking diff - tools: better zconf checking - tools: remove git diff exit-code and lint the code Committers 1 - Andrea Fassina PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/48054 Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/security-wg/issues/973 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca ------------------------------ Generated metadata ------------------------------ PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/48054 Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/security-wg/issues/973 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ⚠ Commits were pushed since the last review: ⚠ - tools: zlib update by checking latest commit ⚠ - tools: update zlib with a delay of 2 days ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - Update tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh ⚠ - tools: exclude deleted files from checking diff ⚠ - tools: better zconf checking ⚠ - tools: remove git diff exit-code and lint the code ℹ This PR was created on Thu, 18 May 2023 07:09:19 GMT ✔ Approvals: 2 ✔ - Marco Ippolito (@marco-ippolito): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/48054#pullrequestreview-1435422412 ✔ - Luigi Pinca (@lpinca): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/48054#pullrequestreview-1436303379 ✘ Last GitHub CI failed ℹ Green GitHub CI is sufficient -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ✔ Aborted `git node land` session in /home/runner/work/node/node/.ncuhttps://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/5065863953 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
First commit message does not adhere to guidelines.
tools/dep_updaters/update-zlib.sh
Outdated
# This is a rather arbitrary restriction. This script is assumed to run on | ||
# Sunday, shortly after midnight UTC. This check thus prevents pulling in the | ||
# most recent commits if any changes were made on Friday or Saturday (UTC). | ||
# Because of Google's own "Live at Head" philosophy, new bugs that are likely to | ||
# affect Node.js tend to be fixed quickly, so we don't want to pull in a commit | ||
# that was just pushed, and instead rather wait for the next week's update. If | ||
# no commits have been pushed in the last two days, we assume that the most | ||
# recent commit is stable enough to be pulled in. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wrote this comment specifically for GoogleTest. Are you sure that this exact wording, in its entirety, is true for the Chromium fork of zlib, too?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tniessen I left your comment because your english is better than mine and is very well explained what happens in the next lines of code.
However I think that the text thus modified is correct; let me know if that's okay so I can update the comment. Thanks
This is a rather arbitrary restriction. This script is assumed to run on
Sunday, shortly after midnight UTC. This check thus prevents pulling in the
most recent commits if any changes were made on Friday or Saturday (UTC).
Because of Google's own "Live at Head" philosophy, new bugs that are likely towe don't want to pull in a commit
affect Node.js tend to be fixed quickly, so
that was just pushed, and instead rather wait for the next week's update. If
no commits have been pushed in the last two days, we assume that the most
recent commit is stable enough to be pulled in.
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: nodejs#48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Landed in 860d7e3 |
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: #48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: #48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: nodejs#48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: nodejs#48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Zlib rarely gets new tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the upstream default branch to check if an update is available. Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973 PR-URL: nodejs#48054 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Zlib
rarely creates tags or releases, so now we use the latest commit on the main branch to check if an update is needed.Refs: nodejs/security-wg#973