Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-4.1 v3 00/12] bundle edk2 platform firmware with QEMU

[Laszlo Ersek]

(Keeping Fam on the address list, adding Dan & Markus)

On 03/27/19 14:18, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/03/19 11:40, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) The image file at
>>>>> <http://download.patchew.org/openbsd-6.1-amd64.img.xz> has been
>>>>> recently uploaded ("Last-Modified: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:48:18 GMT")
>>>>> by someone unknown to me, and its sha256sum doesn't match the
>>>>> sha256sum in the "tests/vm/openbsd" test script.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is why my earlier attempts at the OpenBSD build test have
>>>>> failed.
>>>>>
>>>> Can someone include Fam/Paolo/Brad in this thread please? (I don't
>>>> have their emails in my cellphone). Thanks.
>>> Done.
>> - do we have any idea what happened on download.patchew.org (i.e. why
>> the image matching the script was replaced with an image not matching
>> the script)?
>
> The update was requested by Daniel in this thread:
> https://patchew.org/QEMU/address@hidden/
>
> Fam did the update, but forgot to update the sha256sum.

Thank you for tracking this down!

But, it's not just the sha256sum that needs an update in
"tests/vm/openbsd". In addition to that, the script refers to the
compiler under the name

  x86_64-unknown-openbsd6.1-gcc-4.9.4

This compiler is not available in the updated OpenBSD disk image, either
pre-installed, or from the network. Like I described here:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-03/msg06277.html

the preinstalled compiler ("gcc") is version 4.2.1, and the one that's
available from the network, with "pkg_add", is called differently:

  x86_64-unknown-openbsd6.4-gcc-4.9.4

So, my take is that *both* the script is out-of-sync with the new
OpenBSD image, *and* the OpenBSD image is unusable (for this particular
test) and has never been verified.

... Which in turn raises the question: *before* Peter reported the "xz"
failure first, against my series, at

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-03/msg05452.html

what image had Peter been using? Because, as far as I see it, at
that point there was *no* way for the OpenBSD build test to succeed,
*regardless* of my series. The compiler must not have been available.

In fact, what OpenBSD image is Peter using *right now*, for the
build-QEMU-on-OpenBSD test? Again, I see no way how that could
succeed right now.

... Honestly, given that the OpenBSD image was broken & out-of-sync to
begin with, I feel it was questionable to block my series (= Phil's
PULL) from 4.0, just because the series placed an *additional*
requirement (namely "xz") on the OpenBSD image, which had *already* been
in sore need of a functional C compiler. :/

---*---

OK, let me be constructive here. Right now, the *current*
"tests/vm/openbsd" script is unusable for *any* testing. (My testing did
succeed agains the previous image, which is still available under a
different name.) Who's going to fix the current image, and who's going
to fix the script? And when?

Regarding my own series, after all this churn, I'll stick with using bz2
in it; the xz->bz2 storage "loss" is minimal, about 1%.

Thanks,
Laszlo