Add conditionals for Rhel9 in common role #3802
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@AswathySK can we make these conditions smarter so we don't have to keep updating them every time a new OS is released? Or do we prefer to leave it like this so we can test the new major OS releases?
|
@AdamBrousseau instead of changing conditional to do it for everything greater than or equal to rhel 8 instead? |
|
Sure. We can get other opinions. If we change it to be something like |
|
@sxa do you have an opinion on the above? |
AswathySK
force-pushed
the
rhel9-conditionals
branch
from
d93844c
to
6f9a6e3
Compare
Signed-off-by: Aswathy S Kumar <aswathyskumar144@gmail.com>
AswathySK
force-pushed
the
rhel9-conditionals
branch
from
d831534
to
e9ee426
Compare
|
@AdamBrousseau , I have made the change as per your suggestion. |
| yum: name=https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-{{ ansible_distribution_major_version }}.noarch.rpm | ||
| failed_when: false | ||
| when: | ||
| - ansible_architecture != "s390x" | ||
| - (ansible_distribution_major_version == "8") or (ansible_distribution_major_version == "6") or (ansible_distribution_major_version == "7") | ||
| - (ansible_distribution_major_version | int >= 6) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this is needed for rhel6+ why do we even need a condition for it?
| package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | ||
| with_items: "{{ Java_RHEL8 }}" | ||
| when: (ansible_distribution_major_version == "8") | ||
| when: (ansible_distribution_major_version | int >= 8) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are these 3 cases still what we want?
From
Java_RHEL8:
- java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel
Java_NOT_RHEL6_PPC64: # Not RHEL8 either
- java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel
- java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel
Java_RHEL6_PPC64:
- java-1.7.0-ibm-devel
- java-1.8.0-ibm-devel
What is java 7 and 8 used for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@AdamBrousseau @sxa , I am not sure. Should we bump it to 17 or 21?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I can tell it's been there since the beginning. Java is needed for 2 purposes that I know of.
- Connecting agents to jenkins.
- Bootjdk for compiling java.
Since Jenkins now requires jdk17 to run agents, and jdk11 was required 2 years ago, I don't think leaving this at java8 for jenkins connections is necessary.
For bootjdk requirement, the build scripts will pull the needed jdk during the build process so having a permanent install of 8 is not necessary in my opinion.
I would want an opinion from Adopt/@sxa before we remove it completely though.
| @@ -52,11 +52,11 @@ | |||
| ########################## | |||
| # Additional build tools # | |||
| ########################## | |||
| - name: Install additional build tools if NOT RHEL 8 | |||
| - name: Install additional build tools if NOT RHEL 8 AND RHEL9 | |||
| package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | |||
| with_items: "{{ Additional_Build_Tools_NOT_RHEL8 }}" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we rename this variable to Additional_Build_Tools_NOT_RHEL8Plus?
| @@ -102,11 +102,11 @@ | |||
| - (ansible_distribution_major_version == "6") or (ansible_distribution_major_version == "7") | |||
| tags: build_tools | |||
|
|
|||
| - name: Install additional build tools for RHEL 8 | |||
| - name: Install additional build tools for RHEL >= 8 | |||
| package: "name={{ item }} state=latest" | |||
| with_items: "{{ Additional_Build_Tools_RHEL8 }}" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we rename this variable to Additional_Build_Tools_RHEL8Plus?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That sounds good.
The common role for Unix playbook doesnt include conditionals for rhel9 causing playbook failures.
Failures caused due to current condition:
Checklist