[Bug 1076768] New: [Build 20180117] openQA test fails in start_install
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768 Bug ID: 1076768 Summary: [Build 20180117] openQA test fails in start_install Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/585858/modules/start _install/steps/5 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: YaST2 Assignee: yast2-maintainers@suse.de Reporter: dimstar@opensuse.org QA Contact: jsrain@suse.com Found By: --- Blocker: --- ## Observation openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-NET-x86_64-cryptlvm@64bit fails in [start_install](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/585858/modules/start_install/steps/5) ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [20180117](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/585483) ## Expected result Last good: [20180116](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/583951) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=opensuse&test=cryptlvm&version=Tumbleweed&flavor=NET&machine=64bit) ## Manual debug I reproduced this locally on an openQA instance and at the point seen in the screenshots, y2start had been killed due to oom. The openQA workers by default get 1GB RAM allocated, which seems no longer sufficient with the NET installer; The installation from DVD works with 1GB RAM. (as a workaround, we will change the setupt to use 1.5GB for the NET Medium - so even though openQA will show the tests successful in the future, this is not magically disappearing) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c1
--- Comment #1 from Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c2
Christopher Hofmann
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c4
Ancor Gonzalez Sosa
We need to find out what changed since build 20180116 (last working build) that eats so much memory.
I tried to check what installation-relevant packages changed between both versions (I hope I did it right, I'm not 100% sure I got the two relevant builds). Diff attached. The most obvious difference is ruby2.4 vs ruby2.5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c5
Ancor Gonzalez Sosa
Created attachment 757500 [details] Diff of .packages.root
I tried to check what installation-relevant packages changed between both versions (I hope I did it right, I'm not 100% sure I got the two relevant builds). Diff attached.
The most obvious difference is ruby2.4 vs ruby2.5
Forget about my previous comment and my previous diff. I compared two wrong versions. This new diff compares the right thing and shows a much more plausible culprit - the switch from libstorage to libstorage-ng (and thus, from yast2-storage to yast2-storage-ng). It comes with absolutely no surprise that the new system is more hungry than the previous one. This is a nice opportunity to check how much. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c6
--- Comment #6 from Jiri Srain
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c7
--- Comment #7 from Steffen Winterfeldt
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
Steffen Winterfeldt
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076768#c42
Christopher Hofmann
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply@novell.com