Hi Niek, On 2/17/21 9:57 PM, Niek Linnenbank wrote: > Hi Daniel, Philippe, > > Op di 16 feb. 2021 10:49 schreef Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com > <mailto:berra...@redhat.com>>: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 03:10:00PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > Hi Niek and QEMU community, > > > > On 2/11/21 11:00 PM, Niek Linnenbank wrote: > > > The following are maintenance patches for the Allwinner H3. The > first patch > > > is a proposal to relocate the binary artifacts of the acceptance > tests away > > > from the apt.armbian.com <http://apt.armbian.com> domain. In the > past we had problems with artifacts being > > > removed, and now the recently added Armbian 20.08.1 image has > been removed as well: > > > > > > $ wget > > https://dl.armbian.com/orangepipc/archive/Armbian_20.08.1_Orangepipc_bionic_current_5.8.5.img.xz > > <https://dl.armbian.com/orangepipc/archive/Armbian_20.08.1_Orangepipc_bionic_current_5.8.5.img.xz> > > > Connecting to dl.armbian.com <http://dl.armbian.com> > (dl.armbian.com <http://dl.armbian.com>)|2605:7900:20::5|:443... > connected. > > > ... > > > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found > > > 2021-02-11 22:34:45 ERROR 404: Not Found. > > > > > > I've now added the artifacts to a server maintained by me. The > machine has a stable > > > uptime of several years, ~100Mbit bandwidth and plenty of > available storage. > > > Also for other artifacts if needed. I'm open to discuss if there > is a proposal > > > for a better location for these artifacts or a more generic qemu > location. > > > > Thanks for trying to fix this long standing problem. > > > > While this works in your case, this doesn't scale to the community, > > as not all contributors have access to such hardware and bandwidth / > > storage. > > > > While your first patch is useful in showing where the artifacts are > > stored doesn't matter - as long as we use cryptographic hashes - I > > think it is a step in the wrong direction, so I am not keen on > > accepting it. > > > > My personal view is that any contributor should have the same > > possibilities to add tests to the project. Now I am also open to > > discuss with the others :) I might be proven wrong, and it could > > be better to rely on good willing contributors rather than having > > nothing useful at all. > > There aren't many options here > > 1. Rely on a vendor to provide stable download URLs for images > > 2. QEMU host all images we use in testing > > 3. Contributor finds some site to upload images to > > > For the armbian images we rely on (1), but the URLs didn't turn out > to be > stable. In fact no OS vendor seems to have guaranteed stable URLs > forever, > regardless of distro, though most eventually do have an archive site > that > has good life. Armbian was an exception in this respect IIUC. > > (2) would solve the long term stability problem as QEMU would be in full > control, and could open it up for any images we need. The big challenge > there is that QEMU now owns the license compliance problem. Merely > uploading > binary images/packages without the corresponding source is generally > a license > violation. QEMU could provide hosting, but we need to be clear about > the fact > that we now own the license compliance problem ourselves. Many sites > hosting > images simply ignore this problem, but that doesn't make it right. > > > This series is proposing (3), with a site the contributor happens to > control > themselves, but using a free 3rd party hosting site is no different > really. > Again there is a the same need for license compliance, but it is now the > responsibility of the user, not QEMU project. > > In this http://www.freenos.org/pub/qemu/cubieboard/ > <http://www.freenos.org/pub/qemu/cubieboard/> site I can't even see a > directory listing, so even if corresponding source does exist in > this server, > I can't find it. > > The isn't really a problem for QEMU CI to consume the images, but as > a free > software developer I don't like encouraging practices that are not > compliant > with licensing reuqirement. > > It is an open question whether the (3) is really better than (1) in > terms > of URL stability long term, especially if running off a user's personal > server. > > > I understand your concerns. My goal here was to be able to re-activate > the orangepi tests, so we can capture bugs early on.
I hope you understand the concern I have is not with you in particular, and I used your case to start a discussion with the QEMU community. FWIW I missed the URL change because I still have the image cached in Avocado so my testing ran fine. Which makes me wonder... Cleber, Willian, should Avocado display information about cached artifacts? Such "Using artifact downloaded 7 months ago". > So what I can do > instead is: > > - update the patch to use github to store the artifacts, and their > licenses (other tests also use github) Until there is better solutions, this is the option I prefer. > - or change the patch to use updated armbian links that work (for now) > > If we can agree on either of these solutions, so the orangepi tests can > be re-activated, that would be great. > > Kind regards, > Niek
