Bugzilla – Bug 1219294
[Build 50.1] openQA test fails in detect_yast2_failures
Last modified: 2024-01-30 08:54:36 UTC
Created attachment 872265 [details] save_y2logs The test is getting and parsing the yast logs from a an installation test that finishes successfully without any reported issues. The parent test is using all default settings for installation but partitioning (creates RAID0 volumes and uses btrfs for the operating system partition). While parsing the y2logs, the test detect the following error message twice: /tmp/var/log/YaST2/y2log-2.gz:2024-01-26 21:52:38 <3> install(4329) [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_fork_and_exec):503 exec failed: 2 bug: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219289 could be relevant ## Observation openQA test in scenario sle-15-SP6-Online-x86_64-detect_yast2_failures@64bit fails in [detect_yast2_failures](https://openqa.suse.de/tests/13365524/modules/detect_yast2_failures/steps/538) ## Test suite description Specific test displaying as much dialogs as possible to increase test coverage, which would fail hard in case any yast2 failure is found in logs. ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [48.2](https://openqa.suse.de/tests/13340322) ## Expected result Last good: (unknown) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.suse.de/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=sle&flavor=Online&machine=64bit&test=detect_yast2_failures&version=15-SP6)
Looks like /sbin/dmraid is not in the inst-sys: > 2024-01-26 21:52:37 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(SystemCmd):104 constructor SystemCmd(</sbin/dmraid --activate yes --no_partitions>) > 2024-01-26 21:52:37 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(execute):371 SystemCmd Executing:"/sbin/dmraid --activate yes --no_partitions" > 2024-01-26 21:52:37 <3> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_fork_and_exec):503 exec failed: 2 > 2024-01-26 21:52:37 <3> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_wait):582 THROW: Command not found: "/sbin/dmraid --activate yes --no_partitions" > 2024-01-26 21:52:37 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_wait):603 child_retcode:127 > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(SystemCmd):104 constructor SystemCmd(</sbin/dmraid --sets=active -ccc>) > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(execute):371 SystemCmd Executing:"/sbin/dmraid --sets=active -ccc" > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(execute):372 timestamp [108.314373], 2024-01-27 02:52:38 GMT, 2024-01-26 21:52:38 EST > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_fork_and_exec):475 child_pid:5920 > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <3> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_fork_and_exec):503 exec failed: 2 > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <3> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_wait):582 THROW: Command not found: "/sbin/dmraid --sets=active -ccc" > 2024-01-26 21:52:38 <1> [libstorage] SystemCmd.cc(step_wait):603 child_retcode:127 > grep dmraid _packages.root (nothing) On my Leap 15.5: > [sh @ balrog] ~ 3 % ls -l /sbin/dmraid > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 25416 25. Mai 2018 /sbin/dmraid > [sh @ balrog] ~ 4 % rpm -qf /sbin/dmraid > dmraid-1.0.0.rc16-3.26.x86_64
Created attachment 872266 [details] dmraid package disk space usage The whole package is 388 kiB large, only the binary and the libs are 276 kiB.
AFAIR we do not support dmraid in SLE15. Logging of the error message has changed - nothing more.
I just checked on SLE-15 SP5 (SLE-15-SP5-Full-x86_64-GM-Media1.iso), and it's not there either. > 0:install:/ # ls -l /sbin/dmraid > ls: cannot access '/sbin/dmraid': No such file or directory > 0:install:/ # ls -l /usr/sbin/dmraid > ls: cannot access '/usr/sbin/dmraid': No such file or directory > 0:install:/ # grep dmraid .packages.root > 0:install:/ #
dmraid? - see bug 1088570.
(In reply to Arvin Schnell from comment #3) > AFAIR we do not support dmraid in SLE15. Logging of the error message > has changed - nothing more. OK, thanks. @Sofia: So this is just a harmless message. But it's better to double-check.
(In reply to Stefan Hundhammer from comment #6) > (In reply to Arvin Schnell from comment #3) > > AFAIR we do not support dmraid in SLE15. Logging of the error message > > has changed - nothing more. > > OK, thanks. > > @Sofia: So this is just a harmless message. But it's better to double-check. Ok, thanks for taking a look.