Bug #17293

Install python-opencv and imagemagick on isotesters

Added by anonym 2019-12-02 21:32:53 . Updated 2019-12-06 06:37:36 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Infrastructure
Target version:
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

40%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Sysadmin
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

For my soon to be published work on Bug #15460 I need the following debian packages deployed on our isotesters:

  • python-opencv (for stretch but from buster and on we’ll want python3-opencv)
  • python-pil (same as above)
  • imagemagick

Files

0002-Explicitly-install-xdotool-as-dependency-for-our-Sik.patch (750 B) anonym, 2019-12-03 11:17:42
0001-Install-dependencies-for-our-homegrown-Sikuli-replac.patch (1123 B) anonym, 2019-12-03 11:17:42

Subtasks

History

#1 Updated by anonym 2019-12-03 11:13:06

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Needs Validation
  • % Done changed from 0 to 40

I think I figured out how to add these, but I don’t have write access to the puppet-tails repo so I cannot do a PR. See attached patches instead!

#2 Updated by anonym 2019-12-03 11:17:11

Once those patches are deployed we should keep this ticket open (or open a new one): we also want to remove libsikulixapi-java, but we only want that once Bug #15460 is merged into all base branches.

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2019-12-03 17:17:37

  • Assignee set to intrigeri

Hi anonym,

I’m excited about your work on killing Sikuli so I’ll take this one.

In passing, if you assign such tickets to the “Sysadmins” group, I believe every sysadmin gets a notification. While if you don’t, likely only I see it, until one of my team-mates looks at our full view of sysadmin tickets and notices the new one (I don’t know how likely it is to work).

Cheers!

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2019-12-03 17:34:48

  • Status changed from Needs Validation to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)

Perfect IMO! Thanks for teaching me the * (“splat”) array operator!

Deployed on our production isotesters.

#6 Updated by anonym 2019-12-03 19:35:00

intrigeri wrote:
> In passing, if you assign such tickets to the “Sysadmins” group, I believe every sysadmin gets a notification. While if you don’t, likely only I see it, until one of my team-mates looks at our full view of sysadmin tickets and notices the new one (I don’t know how likely it is to work).

That is what I wanted, since I don’t know who is on sysadmin duty. I might be failing to see your implicit message in what you wrote (?). Did I do the right thing or should I have done something else?

#7 Updated by intrigeri 2019-12-05 20:05:57

> intrigeri wrote:
>> In passing, if you assign such tickets to the “Sysadmins” group, I believe every sysadmin gets a notification. While if you don’t, likely only I see it, until one of my team-mates looks at our full view of sysadmin tickets and notices the new one (I don’t know how likely it is to work).

> That is what I wanted, since I don’t know who is on sysadmin duty. I might be failing to see your implicit message in what you wrote (?).

My goal was to gently hint you about the new preferred way to bring issues to the attention of our sysadmins (I don’t remember if it’s been announced anywhere and I know it’s easy to miss/forget this sort of things; at least, for me it is). I could also have pointed you to https://tails.boum.org/contribute/working_together/roles/sysadmins/#communication but I preferred explaining why this new approach works better.
I did not mean anything else than this.

> Did I do the right thing or should I have done something else?

Given you had not the needed info in mind when you filed this ticket (hence the need for the explanation I provided), I don’t think it would be fair to say you “should” have done something else :)

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2019-12-06 06:37:36

And maybe I was unclear again: to assign a ticket to the “Sysadmins” group, click on the list of candidate assignees, as if you wanted to assign to me, then scroll to the bottom and there you’ll see “Sysadmins”.