Feature #14696

Install Tor Browser 7.0.6

Added by anonym 2017-09-21 13:18:54 . Updated 2017-09-28 18:48:41 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
High
Assignee:
Category:
Target version:
Tails_3.2
Start date:
2017-09-21
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
feature/14696-tor-browser-7.0.6
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Browser
Deliverable for:

Description

Subtasks

Related issues

Blocks Tails - Feature #13234: Core work 2017Q3: Foundations Team Resolved 2017-06-29

History

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-21 13:49:53

#2 Updated by anonym 2017-09-21 23:15:33

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • % Done changed from 0 to 30
  • Feature Branch set to feature/14696-tor-browser-7.0.6

Let’s see what jenkins thinks:

#3 Updated by anonym 2017-09-22 11:49:46

  • Assignee changed from anonym to intrigeri
  • % Done changed from 30 to 50
  • QA Check set to Ready for QA

Only unrelated test failures on jenkins.

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-22 12:09:20

  • Assignee changed from intrigeri to anonym
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Info Needed

Like last time (since we don’t exercise Tor Browser much on Jenkins): what fragile tests did you run yourself?

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-22 13:03:34

Wrt. selfrando: I see it enabled in the alpha builds of Tor Browser, but not in the stable ones. The way I checked this is to checkout relevant tags in https://git.torproject.org/builders/tor-browser-bundle.git and git grep SELFRANDO_write_layout_file=: tbb-7.5a4-build4 has it, while tbb-7.0.6-build2 hasn’t. If I missed something and this is really enabled in Tor Browser 7.0.x, I’d like a better reference than a ticket titled “Integrate selfrando into the alpha Linux 64bit builds” :)

Also, do you expect us to have to upgrade Tor Browser again for Tails 3.2? I’m asking because this branch is not fetching the tarballs from our own archive.

#6 Updated by anonym 2017-09-22 13:46:28

  • QA Check changed from Info Needed to Dev Needed

#7 Updated by anonym 2017-09-22 15:26:46

  • Assignee changed from anonym to intrigeri
  • QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Ready for QA

intrigeri wrote:
> Like last time (since we don’t exercise Tor Browser much on Jenkins): what fragile tests did you run yourself?

I successfully ran all of torified_browsing.feature and unsafe_browser.feature. Note that this was with a build from commit:343be35f2d263a749ebd9b07bf2370c5db0c81b6 so selfrando was enabled. IMHO that should only make things worse, so I think we still can trust my local run’s results even though we will disable selfrando.

What do you think?

> Wrt. selfrando: I see it enabled in the alpha builds of Tor Browser, but not in the stable ones. The way I checked this is to checkout relevant tags in https://git.torproject.org/builders/tor-browser-bundle.git and git grep SELFRANDO_write_layout_file=: tbb-7.5a4-build4 has it, while tbb-7.0.6-build2 hasn’t. If I missed something and this is really enabled in Tor Browser 7.0.x, I’d like a better reference than a ticket titled “Integrate selfrando into the alpha Linux 64bit builds” :)

You are completely right! I looked in the master branch, saw this commit, and then noticed that it was in the maint-7.0 branch too, but failed to see that it was reverted later and thought I had messed up for the past five months. Bit apparently I only messed up yesterday, which is good news I suppose. So I reverted the commit.

> Also, do you expect us to have to upgrade Tor Browser again for Tails 3.2? I’m asking because this branch is not fetching the tarballs from our own archive.

Nope, I’ve fixed this now.

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-23 08:58:02

> intrigeri wrote:
>> Like last time (since we don’t exercise Tor Browser much on Jenkins): what fragile tests did you run yourself?

> I successfully ran all of torified_browsing.feature and unsafe_browser.feature. Note that this was with a build from commit:343be35f2d263a749ebd9b07bf2370c5db0c81b6 so selfrando was enabled. IMHO that should only make things worse, so I think we still can trust my local run’s results even though we will disable selfrando.

> What do you think?

I agree in theory but practice can be surprising at times. I didn’t want to take any such bet so I’ve run the full test suite (yeah for +force-all-tests) on my local Jenkins and it passed (except a couple installation tests, as expected, and an unrelated failure).

Merging!

#9 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-23 09:01:29

  • Status changed from In Progress to Fix committed
  • % Done changed from 50 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:580febeb60af0129386081851ff7225c734aff1f.

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2017-09-23 09:43:08

  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass

#11 Updated by anonym 2017-09-28 18:48:41

  • Status changed from Fix committed to Resolved