Re: [Fuego] Introducing myself to Fuego

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fuego <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Venkata Seshagiri Pyla
> 
> Hello Fuego team,
> 
> My name is Venkata, an Embedded Systems developer working for Toshiba.
> 
> I recently started working on Fuego Test system and I am happy contribute to this community.

Welcome to Fuego development!  It is always nice to have more people helping with
development of the system.

I apologize it took so long to respond.  Last week was a major holiday in the US, and I have
been away from work since last Tuesday.
> 
> As a start I am fixing one of the issues mentioned in http://fuegotest.org/wiki/Functional.LTP_issues
> <http://fuegotest.org/wiki/Functional.LTP_issues>

Thanks.  These would be nice to get fixed.

> 
> and submitted a PR for the same https://bitbucket.org/fuegotest/fuego-core/pull-requests/1 <https://bitbucket.org/fuegotest/fuego-
> core/pull-requests/1>
> kindly provide your feedback.

The commit modifies 3 files:
1. scripts/functions.sh

The modification in this file is not needed any more.
The call to ov_rootfs_getlog should now work.

I added this new function to fuego-core/overlays/base/base-distrib.fuegoclass, as part
of work to refactor system log handling for another project, that had been out-of-tree.
I made a mistake when committing that other work, and missed including the changes
to the base-distrib.fuegoclass file in that commit.

See commit 6d62610, which I pushed today to the master branch.

Sorry about that.

2. tests/Functional.LTP/fuego_test.sh
This uncomments the call to ltp_process.py

This code looks OK, as long as ltp_process.py works.

3. tests/Functional.LTP/ltp_process.py
I don't know anything about this module, but the code looks OK to me by inspection.

I reviewed this patch in bitbucket, merged it, and edited out (removed) the change to
scripts/functions.sh.  Please check to see if things work as expected for you.

> 
> 
> 
> Also I am facing some issues while installing Fuego test system,
> 
> and created an issue ticket for the same in Fuego wiki http://fuegotest.org/wiki/Issue_0085?action=show
> <http://fuegotest.org/wiki/Issue_0085?action=show>
> 
> I am not much aware of Jenkins Installation and so seeking your guidance to solve this installation problem.,

Ugh.  It looks like the Jenkins people have removed the Debian package for 2.164.2.  This may
force us into doing an upgrade of the Jenkins version.  Thanks for this report!

Another group saw the "missing jenkins_cli.jar" file issue.  Apparently , other Jenkins versions use a
reference to Jenkins_cli.jar that is versioned.  This can be corrected by adding a symlink in the
Docker filesystem, like so:

cd /var/cache/jenkins/war/WEB-INF
ln -s lib/cli-${JENKINS_VERSION}.jar jenkins-cli.jar

See https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/fuego/2020-October/003547.html

I'll try to work on an update strategy for Jenkins this week.

> 
> Also, I see some interesting commits regarding eliminate jenkins-cli.jar https://bitbucket.org/fuegotest/fuego-
> core/commits/b019ac2a2e7d16b03d24083c2fce868d736a61ec <https://bitbucket.org/fuegotest/fuego-
> core/commits/b019ac2a2e7d16b03d24083c2fce868d736a61ec>
> 
> So is there any plan to update Docker file to eliminate calling jenkins-cli.jar?

That would be nice.  We were able to remove the reference to jenkins-cli.jar from the 'ftc'
program, but there are still references to it in the Dockerfile and in install-debian.sh to install
the flot plugin.

It might be possible to avoid using jenkins-cli.jar to install the plugin. It appears that
frontend-install/install-plugins.sh installs plugins without resorting to the use of jenkins-cli.jar
(it appears to only use local filesystem operations inside the Docker container).

Removing the need for the jar file would, IMHO, be nice.  But we might want to leave it
for backwards compatibility with previous Fuego/Jenkins users.


Can you try a newer version of Jenkins, and let me know if you see any problems?
 -- Tim