It's not really a good idea to have the comments that explain
the test_flags in *every* test, because they can go stale and
then we either have to live with them being old or update them
all. Like, now. So let's just take 'em all out. There's always
a reference in the openQA and os-autoinst docs, and those get
updated faster.
More importantly, add the new `ignore_failure` flag to relevant
tests - all the tests that don't have the 'important' or
'fatal' flag at present. Upstream killed the 'important' flag
(making all tests 'important' by default), I got it replaced
with the 'ignore_failure' flag, we now need to explicitly mark
all modules we want the 'ignore_failure' behaviour for.
Noticed in e.g. https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/58798
we're doing this wrong, `boot_decrypt` was moved into utils as
a function, but we were still calling it as a method...
Summary:
This adds a couple of new exporter modules, renames main_common
to utils (this is a better name: openSUSE's main_common is
functions used in main.pm, utils is what they call their module
full of miscellaneous commonly-used functions), and moves a
bunch of utility functions that were previously needlessly
implemented as instance methods in base classes into the
exporter modules. That means we can get rid of all the annoying
$self-> syntax for calling them.
We get rid of `fedorabase` entirely, as it's no longer useful
for anything. Other base classes keep the 'standard' methods
(like `post_fail_hook`) and methods which actually need to be
methods (like `root_console`, whose behaviour is different in
anacondatest and installedtest).
Test Plan:
Do a full test suite run and check everything lines
up. There should be no functional differences from before at all,
this is just a re-org.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel_but_actually_jsedlak_who_uses_stupid_nicknames
Reviewed By: garretraziel_but_actually_jsedlak_who_uses_stupid_nicknames
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qa.fedoraproject.org/D1080
Summary:
os-autoinst implements `script_run` itself now, we aren't
required to implement it ourselves any more. os-autoinst's
implementation is better than ours, as it allows for verifying
the script actually ran (via the redirect-output-to-serial-
console trick).
So this drops our implementation so we'll just use the upstream
one. Where I judged we don't want to bother with the 'check
the command actually ran' feature I've adjusted our direct
`script_run` calls to pass a wait time of 0, which skips the
'wait for command to run' stuff entirely and just does a simple
'type the string and hit enter'.
Because of how the inheritance works, our `assert_script_run`
calls already used the os-autoinst `script_run`, rather than
the one from our distribution.
This should prevent `prepare_test_packages` sometimes going
wrong right after removing the python3-kickstart package, as
we'll properly wait for that removal to complete now (before
we weren't, we'd just start typing the next command while it
was still running, which could result in lost keypresses).
Test Plan:
Check all tests still run OK (I've tried this on
staging and it seems fine).
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D1034
Summary:
I started out wanting to fix an issue I noticed today where
graphical upgrade tests were failing because they didn't wait
for the graphical login screen properly; the test was sitting
at the 'full Fedora logo' state of plymouth for a long time,
so the current boot_to_login_screen's wait_still_screen was
triggered by it and the function wound up failing on the
assert_screen, because it was still some time before the real
login screen appeared.
So I tweaked the boot_to_login_screen implementation to work
slightly differently (look for a login screen match, *then* -
if we're dealing with a graphical login - wait_still_screen
to defeat the 'old GPU buffer showing login screen' problem
and assert the login screen again). But while working on it,
I figured we really should consolidate all the various places
that handle the bootloader -> login, we were doing it quite
differently in all sorts of different places. And as part of
that, I converted the base tests to use POSTINSTALL (and thus
go through the shared _wait_login tests) instead of handling
boot themselves. As part of *that*, I tweaked main.pm to not
require all POSTINSTALL tests have the _postinstall suffix on
their names, as it really doesn't make sense, and renamed the
tests.
Test Plan: Run all tests, see if they work.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D1015
I have a better fix for this coming, but it's a big change that
requires review, so for now, do this. The tests are actually
failing because the 30 second wait_still_screen is too short(!)
- it's triggering while the test is sitting at the 'full Fedora
logo' bootsplash screen then doing a 30 second assert_screen
graphical_login, which is failing because it actually takes
more than 60 seconds to get from the 'full F' screen to the
login screen. So let's just make the wait_still_screen 45
seconds for now.
Summary:
This requires us to handle decryption each time we reboot in
the upgrade process, so factor that little block out into the
base class so we don't have to keep pasting it. It's also a
bit tricky to integrate into the 'catch a boot loop' code we
have to deal with #1349721, but I think this should work. There
is a matching openqa_fedora_tools diff to generate the disk
image.
Test Plan:
Run the tests, check that they work, run the other
upgrade and encrypted install tests and check they still work
properly too.
Reviewers: garretraziel
Reviewed By: garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D922
the updates-testing here was never meant to be permanent, it
was only added when the plugin was very new and we knew the
version in stable was busted. The test cases do not say to use
u-t, so let's not.
We've seen this test fail several times recently because of very
slow metadata downloads at this point, so let's give it longer
to run.
Summary:
I really just want to add the desktop_terminal test, but I think
this refactor is in order now. It splits up loading of the
various test phases (much as SUSE do it) and allows us to run
the post-install tests without the install tests, for e.g. I
tweaked things to allow the upgrade tests to use the existing
_wait_login tests for final login and combine the two upgrade
postinstall tests into one simple one.
This comes with a bit of a behaviour change to make graphical
wait login behave the same as console wait login: it will log
in unless USER_LOGIN is set to 'false'. Previously it only
logged in if both USER_LOGIN and USER_PASSWORD were set, which
I don't think ever happened in a graphical test, so we never
actually did a graphical login. The intent here is we should do
a login on the default_install tests. That's going a bit beyond
the test case, but it seems like a reasonable thing to test. We
can set USER_LOGIN to false if we don't want to do it.
Test Plan:
Do a full test run, make sure the new tests work and
no old tests break.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D839
Summary:
D637 / ec6b3ff4 switched from using needle matches to using
validate_script_output when we want to run a console command
and check the result. validate_script_output is kinda over-
powered when all you want to do is check the command succeeded
(returned 0), though. testapi provides assert_script_run for
doing exactly that - it runs a script and fails if the script
fails (returns anything but 0). This gives us cleaner code and
is slightly more robust; validate_script_output uses the mini
web server on the worker, which I've occasionally seen crap
out, so it seems good to avoid using it when possible. assert_
script_run doesn't need it.
Test Plan: Check all (affected) tests still work properly.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: jskladan, garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D714
Summary:
Updating the stable release prior to doing the update can take
a long time if the image hasn't been updated for a while, and
the upgrade download process itself can take a long time. If
the screen blanks out in either case, either the following
needle match may fail (if we're waiting for a needle) or 'still
screen' may be detected early (if we're waiting for a still
screen), so let's disable screen blanking to avoid it.
Test Plan: Run the upgrade tests and see if they work.
Reviewers: garretraziel, jskladan
Reviewed By: jskladan
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D628
Summary:
This is a first cut which more or less works for now. Issues:
1) We're not really testing the BUILD, here. All the test does
is try and upgrade to the specified VERSION - so it'll be using
the latest 'stable' for the given VERSION at the time the test
runs. This isn't really that terrible, but especially for TC/RC
validation, we might want to make things a bit more elaborate
and set up the repo for the actual BUILD (and disable the main
repos).
2) We'd actually need --nogpgcheck for non-Rawhide, at one
specific point in the release cycle - after Branching but
before Bodhi activation (which is when we can be sure all
packages are signed). This won't matter until 24 branches, and
maybe releng will have it fixed by then...if not, I'll tweak
it.
3) We don't really test that the upgrade actually *happened*
for desktop, at the moment - the only thing in the old test
that really checked that was where we checked for the fedup
boot menu entry, but that has no analog in dnf. What we should
probably do is check that GUI login works, then switch to a
console and check /etc/fedora-release just as the minimal test
does.
Test Plan:
Run the tests. Note that creating the desktop disk
image doesn't work ATM, so I can't verify the desktop test
works, but the minimal one seems to (with D565). There'll be
a matching diff for openqa_fedora_tools to update the test
case names there.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: jskladan, garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D567
Summary:
Root console in anaconda got broken by RHBZ #1222413 - no
shell on tty2. Decided to clean up console use in general as
part of fixing it.
This creates a class 'fedorabase' and has 'anacondalog' and
'fedoralog' both inherit from it. boot_to_login_screen is
moved there (as it seems appropriate) and it has a new
method, console_login, which basically handles 'get me a
shell on a console': if we're already at one it returns,
if not it'll type the user name and the password *if
necessary* (sometimes it's not) and return once it sees a
prompt. It takes a hash of named parameters for user,
password and 'check', which is whether it should die if it
fails to reach a console or not (some users don't want it
to).
anacondalog and fedoralog both get 'root_console' methods
which do something appropriate and then call
console_login; both have a hash of named parameters,
anacondalog's version only bothers with 'check', while
fedoralog's also accepts 'tty' to pick the tty to use.
This also adjusts all things which try to get to a console
prompt to use either root_console or console_login as
appropriate.
It also tweaks the needle tags a bit, drops some unneeded
needles, and adds a new 'user console prompt' needle; we
really just need two versions of the root prompt needle
and two of the user prompt needle (one for <F23, one for
F23+ - the console font changed in F23, and the @ character
at least doesn't match between the two). I think we still
need the <F23 case for upgrade tests, for now.
Test Plan:
Do a full test run and see that more tests
succeed. I've done a run on happyassassin with a hack to
workaround the SELinux issue for interactive installs,
and the results look good. I also fiddled about a bit to
test some different cases, like forcing a failure in a
live test to test post_fail_hook (and hence root_console)
in that scenario, and forcing failures after some console
commands had been run to check that it DTRT when we've
already reached a console, etc.
Reviewers: jskladan, garretraziel
Reviewed By: jskladan, garretraziel
Subscribers: tflink
Differential Revision: https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/D462
