On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 8:48 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > There seems to be another issue with the aarch64 builds now: the > latest -rc3 RPMs are not present in the repo, even though they are > referenced in the repo metadata ... Please let me know if you see this happen again, but I think this was just an usual combination of things coming together, including some rather spectacular timing to catch the repo at just the right point in time to see this. I'll explain a bit more below if you're curious, but everything appears to be working correctly with the 6.13-rc5 builds, at least on my test systems: * https://groups.google.com/g/kernel-secnext/c/i4UAqrY5E8o As far as to why this happened with the -rc3 build, let me first provide some background: - In an effort to limit the amount of disk space needed for repo.paul-moore.com I only keep the last 14 days of builds on that system. - The job which uploads the builds to repo.paul-moore.com first removes all packages built more than 14 days ago, then uploads the new builds, and finally regenerates the repo metadata using createrepo. While there is a window where the packages have been removed and the metadata has not yet been updated, this generally isn't a problem because 1) the time window is relatively short and 2) there generally isn't much interest in "old" secnext kernel builds (it is somewhat counter to the whole bleeding edge testing idea). - When there is a significant backlog of packages to build, as was the case when I restored the aarch64 builder, the package build job starts with the newest src.rpm first and works backwards, because once again, people generally only care about the most recent secnext builds so this approach gets that build out quicker. In this particular case that was likely 6.13-rc3. So, despite 6.13-rc3 being the "latest" kernel build in terms of version, it was one of the older packages in terms of build date and thus when the repo.paul-moore.com was updated with fresh builds, the "old" 6.13-rc3 packages were removed. If the testing farm tests happened to start during that window where the packages had been removed, but the metadata not yet updated, I suspect you would have run into the problem you describe. -- paul-moore.com
