New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 898996 link

Starred by 0 users

Issue metadata

Status: Assigned
Owner:
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Chrome
Pri: 1
Type: Feature

Blocking:
issue 896037



Sign in to add a comment

chrome pfq builders should use binpkgs for build_packages

Project Member Reported by vapier@chromium.org, Oct 25

Issue description

for the purposes of the Chrome PFQ bots (which vet Chrome changes in the current CrOS builds), it should be fine to build the OS side with binpkgs rather than building it all from source all the time

i thought we were already doing this, so either i'm mistaken, or a bug has crept in
 
Cc: tikuta@chromium.org
Cc: la...@chromium.org
Owner: athilenius@chromium.org
athilenius@ ... can you take a look at this as a potential short term fix for the PFQ
Ack. Is P3 an accuracy priority though? There is a lot of P1/P2 work backlogged, so P3 is pretty far down the list.
Labels: -Pri-3 Pri-2
Change to P2. PFQ is suffering because of long build times, and I don't see us changing the PFQ process anytime soon, so this would have immediate impact and good to get done soon. if this is overly complex, please schedule sometime this Q for it.  
i suspect this is "just" a setting in the chromite configs that can be toggled.  maybe having the chrome/chromium pfq configs inherit the incremental configs, or another knob to set directly.  it's been a while since i've looked through config/chromeos_config.py, but i expect Don should be able to provide a starting point.
Labels: PFQ-performance-tracking
No status change as of right now.
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
This issue has an owner, a component and a priority, but is still listed as untriaged or unconfirmed. By definition, this bug is triaged. Changing status to "assigned". Please reach out to me if you disagree with how I've done this.

Comment 10 by jclinton@google.com, Jan 17 (5 days ago)

Components: -Infra>ChromeOS>Build Infra>ChromeOS>CI>WorkflowIntegration
Labels: -Type-Bug -Pri-2 Pri-1 Type-Feature
Alec, are you working on this? If not, please find someone else to finish it: this bug has a lot of external visibility. It should be as simple as flipping the configuration for the PFQ's to allow binary packages.

Sign in to add a comment