and/or the toaster container. In order to move forward with replacing the Build Appliance with the set of containers, we need to make sure that whatever tests we are currently running on the Build Appliance pass on the containers. This is intended to create functionally equivalent tests.
(In reply to comment #0) > and/or the toaster container. In order to move forward with replacing the > Build Appliance with the set of containers, we need to make sure that > whatever tests we are currently running on the Build Appliance pass on the > containers. This is intended to create functionally equivalent tests. Hi Brian, You could find the current BA test cases in: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/tr_show_run.cgi?run_id=6552
The current test cases for BA: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/tr_show_run.cgi?run_id=6552
We have 4 test cases for the Build Appliance: 322 - Build the BA itself. 340 - Boot the BA with Vmplayer, build core-image-minimal, launch image with hob. 565 - Use Hob to build an image then add acpid to the image. 938 - Use Hob to see the build log. ----- Comments wrt the Build Appliance: 1) Hob is no longer in the src tree, so it can't be used. 2) Toaster can be used to do the Hob operations tested above except for launching the image which can be easily done using runqemu. Alternatively these operations can be tested using the cli alone. ---- Comments wrt the containers: 322 - will require having docker installed on the autobuilder slaves, then it's a one line command. 340 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli 565 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli; using the toaster container crops/toaster it can be done with Toaster. Launching the image needs to be done from the cli and we are still knocking off bugs about qemu and vnc to make this possible. 938 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli; using the toaster container crops/toaster it can be done with Toaster. ---- General comment: Currently I expect to replace the Build Appliance with a family of containers rather than one big one: 1) poky for general bitbake cli work 2) toaster for toaster centric people, though it can also be used in a cli fashion 3) esdk container for esdk/devtool folks ---- If this is enough info, please switch the status, otherwise ask for clarification :)
per Stephen suggestion. Moving back to accepted.
(In reply to comment #3) > We have 4 test cases for the Build Appliance: > 322 - Build the BA itself. > > 340 - Boot the BA with Vmplayer, build core-image-minimal, launch image with > hob. > > 565 - Use Hob to build an image then add acpid to the image. > > 938 - Use Hob to see the build log. > > ----- > Comments wrt the Build Appliance: > 1) Hob is no longer in the src tree, so it can't be used. > 2) Toaster can be used to do the Hob operations tested above except for > launching the image which can be easily done using runqemu. Alternatively > these operations can be tested using the cli alone. Hi Brian, After HOB disappeared, we don't use toaster but only use command line "bitbake core-image-minimal" to build the image and runqemu to launch the image in BA. > > ---- > Comments wrt the containers: > > 322 - will require having docker installed on the autobuilder slaves, then > it's a one line command. > 340 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli > 565 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli; > using the toaster container crops/toaster it can be done with Toaster. > Launching the image needs to be done from the cli and we are still knocking > off bugs about qemu and vnc to make this possible. > 938 - using the poky container crops/poky this can be done with the cli; > using the toaster container crops/toaster it can be done with Toaster. > > ---- > General comment: > Currently I expect to replace the Build Appliance with a family of > containers rather than one big one: > 1) poky for general bitbake cli work > 2) toaster for toaster centric people, though it can also be used in a cli > fashion > 3) esdk container for esdk/devtool folks > ---- > If this is enough info, please switch the status, otherwise ask for > clarification :) That's fine to me. Thanks, Yi
Hi Brian, I think you could close this bug.
per comment 6