Re: [PATCH 2/2] scripts/ci_build.sh: Set avocado-framework version to 96.0

[Henning Schild <henning.schild@siemens.com>]

Am Wed,  6 Jul 2022 13:46:55 +0200
schrieb Quirin Gylstorff <Quirin.Gylstorff@siemens.com>:

> From: Quirin Gylstorff <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>
> 
> With avocado-framework version 97.0 the following error occurs:
> ```
> Successfully installed avocado-framework-97.0
> + avocado --show=app,test run /builds/debian/isar/testsuite/citest.py
> -t fast,-repro,-startvm --test-runner=runner --disable-sysinfo -p
> quiet=1 -p cross=1 -p time_to_wait=300 Suite creation for runner
> "runner" is not supported ```
> 
> Force for now version 96.0.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Quirin Gylstorff <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>
> ---
>  scripts/ci_build.sh | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/ci_build.sh b/scripts/ci_build.sh
> index 2513f1a0..b1ec6912 100755
> --- a/scripts/ci_build.sh
> +++ b/scripts/ci_build.sh
> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ if ! command -v avocado > /dev/null; then
>      rm -rf /tmp/avocado_venv
>      virtualenv --python python3 /tmp/avocado_venv
>      source /tmp/avocado_venv/bin/activate
> -    pip install avocado-framework
> +    pip install avocado-framework==96.0

Once the code is reworked so it does not use the legacy feature any
longer this pinning should probably not be dropped, it can be moved
every once in a while, but getting a random version is simply not good.
As we see again here.

Especially not when ilbers does not run this bit in their CI, having
avocado already installed in some version. Maybe we should always use
that venv/pip version no matter if the host is contaminated already
with some other random version.

How is the mainline issue for debian going anyhow?

Time to grab some tequila to wash down the guacamole and sing some "i
told you so" songs. pip pip hurray!

When it comes to testing the maintainer should really make it as simple
as possible for people to run the tests, ideally with the very same
outcome as the pipelines of the maintainer. Also it should be easy for
users to contribute to the test suite, so it will be reasonable to ask
people to bring tests with their features.
IMHO the whole avocado story made both aspects worse than before. Only
for some features that the maintainer wanted, but what they get is
ontested patches because they are the only ones able to run that beast.

Henning


>  fi
>  
>  # Get Avocado build tests path