16 KiB

Raw Blame History

#! TITLE: Britney migration documentation #! SUBTITLE: Understanding britney's workflow

Migrations

This is a technical introduction to how britney handles migrations. Being an introduction, it deliberately oversimplifies certain things at the expense of accuracy. It also covers common migration issues and how to fix them.

The document is primarily aimed at contributors for distributions that want to understand the basics of britney and her migration rules.

The documentation also aspires to be a general purpose document for britney that is applicable for multiple distributions. However, it does reference distribution-specific practises in some examples to prevent the documentation from becoming too abstract. Furthermore, the document assumes familiarity with Debian-based distribution practises and terminology (such as "suites" and "source package").

A high level overview of britney and migrations

The purpose of britney is to (semi-)automatically select a number of migration items from a series of source suites (e.g. Debian unstable) that are ready to migrate to the target suite (e.g. Debian testing).

The definition of "ready" can be summarized as satisfying all of the following points:

The migration items pass a number of policies for the target suite. Most of these policies are basically that the migration items do not regress on selected QA checks.
- An item satisfying this part is called a valid candiate.
Installability will not regress as a result of migrating the migration items.
- An item that (also) satisfies this part will be selected for migration.

The keyword in both points being regress. If a package has an existing issue in the target suite, the item including a new version of that package is generally allowed to migrate if it has the same issue (as it is not a regression).

This only leaves the definition of a migration items. They come in several variants defined in the next section.

Migration items

Internally, britney groups packages into migration items based on a few rules. There are several kinds of migration items and this document will only describe the source migration item.

A source migration item is one upload of a source package, with associated binary packages once built.

Once a new version of a source package appears in the source suite, britney will create track it with a source migration item. As the binary packages are built and uploaded, they will be included into the migration item and various QA checks/policies will be applied to the item.

Once britney deems the item ready, she will attempt to migrate the item (i.e. source with its binaries) to the target suite.

As implied earlier, there are several other migration types. But they are not covered in this document. They deal with cases like removals, rebuilds of existing binaries, etc.

Migration phase 1: Policies / Excuses

To begin with, britney will apply a number of policies to all migration items. Each policy will rate each migration item and the combined results will be added into one of britney's output documents known as the "excuses" (exists in an HTML and a YAML variant). A migration item that passes all applicable policies will be labelled as a valid candidate in the excuses and continue to the next phase.

The policies gives exactly one verdict to each item, some of these verdicts are:

The item passes the policy.
The policy is waiting for test suites before providing a pass/fail result (temporary failure).
The item fails the policy and the failure is believed to be "permanent" (given no external changes).
The item does not pass the policy, but britney has insufficient information to determine if the failure is persistent or not.

It is important to note that all verdicts are based on the current data that britney has access to. This mean that without any change to the items themselves:

Items that passed originally may fail in a later britney run.
Likewise, items may go from a "permanent failure" to a pass.

For the first case, a common example would be a new RC bug. When the package if first uploaded, no body filed an RC bug yet so britney may flag it as "passing" the RC bug policy. Then before it migrates, someone files an RC bug. Once britney becomes aware of this, she will change the verdict from pass to a permanent failure. If the bug is closed without an upload, downgraded or it is determined that the bug is not a regression compared to the target suite, britney will update the verdict again.

For the second case, there was a "hidden" example with the RC bug in the previous paragraph. :) But another example would be that piuparts flags an item as having a regression due to a false positive. The false-positive is then found, fixed and the test is rerun. Once the updated test result reaches britney, she will update her verdict.

Finally, the people running the britney instance can overrule any policy by applying a britney hint, if they deem it necessary. One caveat here is that not all policies can be overridden directly and some will require the "ignore all policies"-hint (known as the force-hint).

Since most policies are defined based on regressions, a hinted migration generally implies that the problem will not prevent future migrations for newer versions of the same source package (assuming that the problem is deterministic).

Migration phase 2: Installability regression testing

For the migration items that pass the previous phase, britney will do a test migration to see if anything becomes uninstallable. This is a more expensive test to ensure the migration does not cause installability regressions.

The status of this phase is not included in the excuses. To debug problems here, the britney log file has to be examined. This requires a bit more technical insight as it has not been polished as much as the excuses.

Confirming a migration

To start with; if a migration is accepted and "committed" (i.e. it will not be rolled back), britney will include in a line starting with final: like in this example:

Apparently successful
final: -cwltool,-libtest-redisserver-perl,-pinfo,-webdis,hol88
start: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
 orig: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
  end: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
SUCCESS (182/177)

The above example is a regular migration run where 4 source removal migration items and one source migration item where accepted (those listed on the final: line). The rest of the information are various statistical counters which are useful for other purposes beyond the scope of this document.

When debugging a migration for an item that passed the previous phase, if the item appears on a final: line like that, then it is migrated. That is, the problem is most likely that the britney run crashes later or the britney's output is not committed to the archive (for reasons outside britney's control).

On the flip side, if the migration item of interest does not appear in a final line, then the migration was rejected (or rolled back).

Reminder: Migration items generally use the name of the source package. There are exceptions to that "rule" (but they are not common cases covered by this document).

Debugging failed migration attempts

Start by confirming that the migration item was not accepted (as described in the above section). If the migration item does not appear on a final: line, then we need to debug the actual migration attempts. Migration attempts look something like this:

trying: -webdis
accepted: -webdis
   ori: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
   pre: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
   now: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
   all: -pinfo -webdis
[...]
trying: libaws
skipped: libaws (0, 165, 11)
    got: 45+0: a-4:i-27:a-5:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
    * arm64: libaws-bin, libaws17.2.2017, libaws3.3.2.2-dev, liblog4ada3-dev
[...]
Trying easy from autohinter: asis/2017-1 dh-ada-library/6.12 [...]
start: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
orig: 41+0: a-4:i-27:a-1:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
easy: 261+0: a-26:i-49:a-23:a-23:a-23:m-22:m-25:m-23:p-23:s-24
    * amd64: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
    * i386: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
    * arm64: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
    * armel: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
[...]
FAILED

This example has one succeeding migration (-webdis) and one failing (libaws) plus finally a failed easy-hint with several packages. Both of the two first are "single item" migrations (i.e. the attempt only includes a single item in isolation). However, Britney can do multi-item migrations (even outside hints).

Please keep in mind that items can attempted multiple times and accepted in a later attempt. It is not always immediately obvious, which attempt is better for debugging. When in doubt, it is usually easiest to look at the attempt with the least amount of new uninstallable packages.

In the libaws example, a total of 4 binary packages become uninstallable on the architecture arm64. Here is the output again with this information high lighted:

migration item(s) being attemped
        vvvvvv
trying: libaws
skipped: libaws (0, 165, 11)
    got: 45+0: a-4:i-27:a-5:a-1:a-1:m-0:m-3:m-1:p-1:s-2
    * arm64: libaws-bin, libaws17.2.2017, libaws3.3.2.2-dev, liblog4ada3-dev
      ^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      |||||        The binary packages becoming uninstallable (here 4)
      Affected architecture (here "arm64")

Please note that britney is lazy and will often reject an item after proving that there is a regression on a single architecture. So in the above example, we are not actually sure whether this problem is architecture specific. For easy-hints, the information is presented slightly different.

Trying easy from autohinter: asis/2017-1 dh-ada-library/6.12 [...]
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                migration item(s) being attemped

[... several lines of statistics from start, before and after ...]
    * amd64: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
      ^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      |||||        The binary packages becoming uninstallable on amd64
      Affected architecture (here "amd64")

    * i386: asis-programs, libasis2017, libasis2017-dev, libaws-bin, [...]
      ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      |||||       The binary packages becoming uninstallable on i386
      Affected architecture (here "i386")
[... more architectures with binary packages becoming uninstallable ...]

While this tells us what britney tried to migrate and what would break (become uninstallable) as a result, it is not very helpful at explaining why things break. If there are few broken packages, it is often a question of looking for Breaks-relations or Depends-relations with upper bounds on versions / on old packages being removed. Alternatively, there are also tools like dose-debcheck, which attempts to analyse and explain problems like this.

Common issues with policy decisions

Britney complains about a fixed bug in the source suite (bug policy)

All decisions about bugs are related to data set extracted from the bug tracker. If britney says that the new version introduces a bug, then it is because the data set from the bug tracker lists that bug for a version in the source suite and without it appearing for the version(s) in the target suite.

Please note that these data sets do not include versions, so britney is unable to tell exactly which versions are affected. The only thing, she can tell, is what suite the bug affects.

There is a number of common cases, where this is observed:

The metadata on the bug is wrong. A known example is the Debian BTS, where if a bug has a fixed version equal to a found version, the bug is considered unfixed.
The bug is fixed, but the old version is still around in the source suite. In this case, britney will generally mention a "missing build" or "old binaries".

If the metadata is wrong, the solution is to fix it in the bug tracker and wait until britney receives a new data set. In the other case, the recommendation is to see the sections on "missing builds" and "old binaries" below. As long as they are present, the package may be blocked by bugs in the older versions of the binaries.

Britney complains about "missing builds"

A "missing build" happens when britney detects that the binaries for a given architecture are missing or is not up to date. This is detected by checking the "Packages" files in the archive, so britney have no knowledge of why the build is missing. Accordingly, this kind of issue is flagged as a "possibly permanent" issue.

If the omission is deliberate (e.g. the new version no longer supports that architecture), then please have the old binaries for that architecture removed from the source suite. Once those are removed, britney will no longer see that as a problem.

Otherwise, please check the build services for any issues with building or uploading the package to the archive.

Common misconceptions: If the architecture is no longer supported, the removal of the old binaries should happen in the source suite (e.g. Debian unstable). However, many people mistakenly request a removal from the target suite (e.g. Debian testing). Unfortunately, this is not the proper solution (and, britney does not support architecture specific removals so it may be difficult to do anyhow).

Britney complains about "old binaries"

Depending on the configuration of the britney instance, this may or may not be a blocker. If the distribution has chosen to enable the "ignore_cruft" option, this is merely a warning/note. That said, even in this mode it can block a package from migration.

This appears when britney detects that there are older versions of the binary packages around, which was built by (an older version of) the same source package.

This is common with distributions where their archive management software is capable of keeping old binaries as long as something depends on them (e.g. DAK as used by Debian). Therefore, the most common solution is to ensure all reverse dependencies are updated to use the new binaries and then have the old ones removed (the latter commonly known as "decrufting"). Technically, this is also solvable by "decrufting" without updating/rebuilding other packages. Though whether this is an acceptable practise depends on the distribution.

Alternatively, if the distribution uses the "ignore_cruft" option, this (in itself) is not a blocker. However, it commonly triggers non-obvious issues:

If the bugs policy is enabled, an bug in the old binaries that is fixed in the new version will still be a blocker. Here, the best solution is to get rid of the old binaries.

(Note: the bugs data is not versioned so britney cannot tell which versions the bug applies to. Just which suite they affect)
Even if the migration item is a valid candidate (i.e. all policy checked have passed), it may cause installability regressions as britney will also attempt to keep the old binaries around as long as they are used. The most often cause of this when the old binaries are not co-installable with the new ones.

(Note: Britney generally only works with the highest version of a given binary. If you have libfoo1 depends on libfoo-data v1 and then libfoo2 depends on libfoo-data v2, then libfoo1 will become uninstallable as libfoo-data v2 will "shadow" libfoo-data v1)

16 KiB Raw Blame History