On 23.7.2020 02:10, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
On Thu, 2020-07-23 at 01:42 +0000, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 22.7.2020 23:40, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2020-07-22 at 15:46 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:11 PM Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
We literally just got done rewriting https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_base_service_manipulation (and the automated version of that test) to use chronyd on the basis that it's a reliable service that we can rely on to exist in all tested editions :/
Find and replace? :D
@core services dnf-makecache.timer auditd.service plymouth-start.service chrony isn't in either @core or @standard groups. It's in server-product and workstation-product (anaconda-tools and system-tools). But it may not be in Cloud, IoT, or CoreOS. I'm not sure.
It's in everything we run the test on. We checked.
You don't get any more reliable service that exist in all tested editions current and in the future other than those that come with the system management framework as in you don't have to worry about specific component being installed which might be subjected removal or being broken due to some change which would break all the test right.
So what made QA choose Chrony in the first place?
IIRC the use of chrony on RHEL and Fedora predates systemd existing, so... it's just picked by default, presumably?
You are misunderstanding the test cases that Adam referred too have nothing to do with Chrony other than Chrony happens to be the component used to test if a service starts and stops correctly which could just as well be done with a service that is already shipped with systemd thus always available regardless of current or future edition and changes that lies within them ( unless the edition would decide to remove systemd which I'm not foreseeing happening in any near future ).
JBG