Skip to content

/ saltfs

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

Add appveyor support for servo's homu #232

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 5, 2016
Merged

Add appveyor support for servo's homu #232

merged 1 commit into from Mar 5, 2016

Conversation

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

Manishearth commented Mar 5, 2016

Don't merge yet, needs servo/homu#13 to merge and then a bump in the homu SHA
r? @larsbergstrom

Review on Reviewable
@Manishearth Manishearth mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2016
Merged
@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Mar 5, 2016

r=me after SHA bump
@larsbergstrom larsbergstrom mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2016
Open
@Manishearth
Add appveyor support for servo's homu
Loading status checks…
5be1c80
@Manishearth Manishearth force-pushed the appveyor branch from d9a98ff to 5be1c80 Mar 5, 2016
@Manishearth
Copy link
Member Author

Manishearth commented Mar 5, 2016

@bors-servo r=larsbergstrom
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

📌 Commit 5be1c80 has been approved by larsbergstrom
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 5be1c80 with merge df0c63f...
bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016
@bors-servo
Auto merge of #232 - servo:appveyor, r=larsbergstrom
Loading status checks…
df0c63f 
Add appveyor support for servo's homu

Don't merge yet, needs servo/homu#13 to merge and then a bump in the homu SHA
r? @larsbergstrom

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="40" alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/saltfs/232)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

💔 Test failed - travis
@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Mar 5, 2016 

          ID: android-dependencies

    Function: pkg.installed

      Result: False

     Comment: An error was encountered while installing package(s): W: Failed to fetch http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/dists/stable/Release  Unable to find expected entry 'main/binary-i386/Packages' in Release file (Wrong sources.list entry or malformed file)



              E: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead.

     Started: 16:53:16.581770

    Duration: 3715.043 ms

     Changes:
@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Mar 5, 2016

@bors-servo retry
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 5be1c80 with merge 10bb6fd...
bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016
@bors-servo
Auto merge of #232 - servo:appveyor, r=larsbergstrom
Loading status checks…
10bb6fd 
Add appveyor support for servo's homu

Don't merge yet, needs servo/homu#13 to merge and then a bump in the homu SHA
r? @larsbergstrom

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="40" alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/saltfs/232)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

💔 Test failed - travis
@aneeshusa
Copy link
Member

aneeshusa commented Mar 5, 2016

Google has dropped support for 32-bit Chrome (planned for March hence the sudden breakage): http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2016/03/fix-failed-to-fetch-google-chrome-apt-error-ubuntu

Is there any reason we need Chrome? If not, I'd rather remove it entirely than trying to modify the appropriate .list file to only try to get the 64-bit builds.
@Manishearth
Copy link
Member Author

Manishearth commented Mar 5, 2016

We don't explicitly mention Chrome anywhere. I don't know why it tries to download chrome.
@aneeshusa
Copy link
Member

aneeshusa commented Mar 5, 2016

I checked via Salt on the builders and you're right, none of our machines have chrome in their apt sources.
The error only happens on the machines with multi-arch enabled, which is the 2 android related machines. My hunch is that the Travis builders have chrome in their sources. I'll try it out in Vagrant to see if that's the case.
@aneeshusa
Copy link
Member

aneeshusa commented Mar 5, 2016

Yup, looks ok in Vagrant. I'll put in a test PR to check Travis.
@aneeshusa
Copy link
Member

aneeshusa commented Mar 5, 2016

See #233 for the Travis test PR
aneeshusa added a commit to aneeshusa/servo-saltfs that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016
@aneeshusa
Remove non-Salted external apt sources
9352db4 
Workaround saltstack/salt#26605
by cleaning the sources.list.d folder first, and running
pkgrepo states that add repositories to the folder afterwards
using require.

This unbreaks servo#232: Travis has the Chrome apt repo configured, but
Google has dropped 32-bit support (March 2016), causing apt to fail
on multiarch hosts. By removing all external repos we will only use
repositories we configure ourselves.
@aneeshusa aneeshusa mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2016
Merged
bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016
@bors-servo
Auto merge of #234 - aneeshusa:clean-external-apt-repos, r=larsbergstrom
Loading status checks…
c90f0df 
Remove non-Salted external apt sources

Workaround saltstack/salt#26605
by cleaning the sources.list.d folder first, and running
pkgrepo states that add repositories to the folder afterwards
using require.

This unbreaks #232: Travis has the Chrome apt repo configured, but
Google has dropped 32-bit support (March 2016), causing apt to fail
on multiarch hosts. By removing all external repos we will only use
repositories we configure ourselves.

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="40" alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/saltfs/234)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Mar 5, 2016

@bors-servo retry
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 5be1c80 with merge 7d376a7...
bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016
@bors-servo
Auto merge of #232 - servo:appveyor, r=larsbergstrom
Loading status checks…
7d376a7 
Add appveyor support for servo's homu

Don't merge yet, needs servo/homu#13 to merge and then a bump in the homu SHA
r? @larsbergstrom

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="40" alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/saltfs/232)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Mar 5, 2016

☀️ Test successful - travis
@bors-servo bors-servo merged commit 5be1c80 into master Mar 5, 2016
1 of 3 checks passed
1 of 3 checks passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build failed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build failed
Details
homu Test successful
Details
@Ms2ger Ms2ger deleted the appveyor branch Mar 15, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants
@Manishearth @larsbergstrom @bors-servo @aneeshusa
You can’t perform that action at this time.