-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 101
Add conditionals for Rhel9 in common role #3802
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AswathySK can we make these conditions smarter so we don't have to keep updating them every time a new OS is released? Or do we prefer to leave it like this so we can test the new major OS releases?
@AdamBrousseau instead of changing conditional to do it for everything greater than or equal to rhel 8 instead? |
Sure. We can get other opinions. If we change it to be something like |
@sxa do you have an opinion on the above? |
d831534
to
e9ee426
Compare
@AdamBrousseau , I have made the change as per your suggestion. |
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/tasks/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | ||
with_items: "{{ Java_RHEL8 }}" | ||
when: (ansible_distribution_major_version == "8") | ||
when: (ansible_distribution_major_version | int >= 8) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are these 3 cases still what we want?
From
infrastructure/ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/vars/RedHat.yml
Line 95 in 894d848
Java_RHEL8: |
Java_RHEL8:
- java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel
Java_NOT_RHEL6_PPC64: # Not RHEL8 either
- java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel
- java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel
Java_RHEL6_PPC64:
- java-1.7.0-ibm-devel
- java-1.8.0-ibm-devel
What is java 7 and 8 used for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AdamBrousseau @sxa , I am not sure. Should we bump it to 17 or 21?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as I can tell it's been there since the beginning. Java is needed for 2 purposes that I know of.
- Connecting agents to jenkins.
- Bootjdk for compiling java.
Since Jenkins now requires jdk17 to run agents, and jdk11 was required 2 years ago, I don't think leaving this at java8 for jenkins connections is necessary.
For bootjdk requirement, the build scripts will pull the needed jdk during the build process so having a permanent install of 8 is not necessary in my opinion.
I would want an opinion from Adopt/@sxa before we remove it completely though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as the boot JDK is concerned I don't want the builds pulling it down dynamically in most cases - that's mostly just a fallback mechanism. Other than pulling down the source, the builds should be able to run without network access.
I suspect those java-1.8.0* packages are no longer required, at least by Temurin, so it would likely be safe to remove them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AdamBrousseau , @sxa ,
Since stewart is of opinion not to pull down the bootjdks by the jobs.And java8 is not required, Should we remove the installing and setting up default java part in this role or should we maybe bump it to jdk17 or 21?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I think that should be safe. It will hopefully be obvious if some part of the process requires it, in which case it's easy to back it out again :-)
Can the 1.7 version be installed from the RHEL9 repositories?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sxa is there another part of the PB installing java for use by the jenkins agent that Adopt is running?
We have an internal Semeru role that installs 21 for this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep. The adoptopenjdk_install role: .
- role: adoptopenjdk_install # JDK21 Build Bootstrap |
It's extracting as a tarball and doesn't set any default on the system to point to it, so the Jenkins agent is pointed directly to it under /usr/lub/jvm when it's started
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It sounds like we don't need any java 8 installs here then?
Stewart has confirmed the Jenkins agent uses the jvm from the adoptopenjdk_install role. That role installs all the bootjdks for the builds. And for Semeru, we have a separate PB for the jenkins agent.
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/tasks/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/tasks/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
e9ee426
to
5586db8
Compare
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
1539331
to
885e859
Compare
@AswathySK Linter failures as well |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A few comments/suggestions in addition to the Java7 on RHEL9 comments above.
Should any of these changes be made in the CentOS files too?
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/tasks/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | ||
with_items: "{{ Additional_Build_Tools_NOT_RHEL8 }}" | ||
with_items: "{{ Additional_Build_Tools_NOT_RHEL8Plus }}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We probably need to go through and sanitise some of these names. This one should probably be Additional_Build_Tools_RHEL6_RHEL7
now but that doesn't need to be changed in this PR
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/tasks/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@@ -92,17 +92,6 @@ Additional_Build_Tools_RHEL7_s390x: | |||
- libstdc++.s390 # a dependency required for executing a 32-bit C binary | |||
- yum-utils # yumdownloader required for devkit creation | |||
|
|||
Java_RHEL8: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since we still have the reference to Java_RHEL8
above I believe this should not be removed
New VPC run at https://ci.adoptium.net/view/Tooling/job/VagrantPlaybookCheck/2038/ (Expect at least CentOS6 to fail - unrelated to this PR) |
@AswathySK merge conflicts. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A block has been put on this Pull Request as this repository is temporarily under a code freeze due to an ongoing release cycle.
If this pull request needs to be merged during the release cycle then please comment /merge
and a PMC member will be able to remove the block.
If the code freeze is over you can remove this block by commenting /thaw
.
Yes and I'd love to see the CEntOS6 and Solaris GH actions start passing again, but I suspect that's a separate issue |
@karianna , |
Not sure, should be by end of this week at the latest though |
Looks like it was done during my time away at FOSDEM :-) |
@sxa ,
We should either import the key or disable the gpg check(not secure).
or just add |
I wonder if we could just install the |
@AdamBrousseau Looks like you still have a pending change request on this - is it still valid? |
Noting that mercurial is no longer needed (unless someone in the IBM team tells me you still need it!) and it was removed on most distributions as part of #3913 - although I see that RedHat.yml got missed from that, so feel free to remove it under this PR too :-) |
@sxa , ![]() |
I definitely don't want to remove the check, so importing the key seems like the better option here. |
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
@sxa , |
The changes look good - thanks! It wont' work for EL10 where the 1.8.0 package doesn't exist but I can cover that in some other changes I'm making for EL10 :-) Running one more set of tests at https://ci.adoptium.net/view/Tooling/job/VagrantPlaybookCheck/2099/ (I expect CentOS6 will still fail, but not because of this PR) |
@@ -153,7 +166,7 @@ | |||
with_items: "{{ Java_NOT_RHEL6_PPC64 }}" | |||
when: | |||
- not (ansible_distribution_major_version == "6" and ansible_architecture == "ppc64") | |||
- not (ansible_distribution_major_version == "8") | |||
- not (ansible_distribution_major_version | int >= 8) | |||
tags: install_java | |||
|
|||
- name: Install Java when RedHat 6 on ppc64 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we remove these 2? I don't think we need ppc64(BE) anymore. I doubt Adopt does either.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Adopt definitely doesn't - as I recall that was left in for IBM internal use so from an Adoptium side I have no particular view one way or another on that one ;-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It sounds like we don't need any java 8 installs here then?
I believe there are some things that rely on having a "default" java in the path. These things in the common role are to set that correctly I believe. In the future we could switch to making one of the Adoptium ones the default on the system but since that's not in place I would not want to remove that from this PR.
That would be a good separate issue/PR though, and should apply to all distributions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fair enough. So cleanup the ppc64 bits and then this will be ready 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AdamBrousseau ,
Sorry I didnt get what you meant.
Do you need me to remove the task to install java for rhel 6 BE?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Honestly I'm not sure. If we are 100% site than nothing requires JDK8 specifically then it should be ok but I'm not that confident at the moment and have requested input from the team as part of #3949 (Also referenced in Slack at https://adoptium.slack.com/archives/C53GHCXL4/p1747759541294539)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can I open a separate PR for removing the ppc64(BE) and updating jdk to 21 for rhel8+ or should it be done in this PR itself?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm absolutely fine with it being separate from this PR since it's not specifically about RHEL9 👍
Hopefully @AdamBrousseau is ok with that approach too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AdamBrousseau ,
Thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sxa @AdamBrousseau ,
I have removed tasks related to rhel6 ppc64.
The jdk version is still untouched.
Maybe once a decision regarding #3949 (comment) is made we can open a separate PR for that?
package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | ||
with_items: "{{ Java_RHEL8 }}" | ||
when: (ansible_distribution_major_version == "8") | ||
when: (ansible_distribution_major_version | int >= 8) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It sounds like we don't need any java 8 installs here then?
Stewart has confirmed the Jenkins agent uses the jvm from the adoptopenjdk_install role. That role installs all the bootjdks for the builds. And for Semeru, we have a separate PB for the jenkins agent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good
@AswathySK I've just seen that one of the conditionals in the NTP_DATE role is wrong:
This will need to be <8 instead of != 8 so that we only try to use Chrony on 9+ too. I'll let you decide if you want to add that change to this PR or create another one (or I can do another PR if you'd prefer) |
@sxa I will make the change in this PR itself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm mostly OK with this, would e good to have sxa's comments addressed
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
ansible/playbooks/AdoptOpenJDK_Unix_Playbook/roles/Common/vars/RedHat.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
To clarify, I'm good with it now - it's just Adam B's requests to remove PPC64BE that are outstanding, then we can merge. |
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This lftm now. Although I'm still confused why we install java 7 & 8 vs 8 only when on rhel8+.
@sxa , Do you know any history related to this? |
This really should be a discussion separate from this PR, but Temurin uses 7 to bootstrap 8 where possible (With one exception, we aim to use RHEL8+ does not java |
The common role for Unix playbook doesnt include conditionals for rhel9 causing playbook failures.
Failures caused due to current condition:
Checklist