Add .travis.yml to test podman deb package on Ubuntu with Travis CI.

[junaruga]

Add .travis.yml to test Ubuntu deb package.
It's related to #3679 (comment) .

I found bionic is available on Travis CI.
https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/reference/bionic/
https://github.com/travis-ci/docs-travis-ci-com/tree/master/user/reference

So, this .travis.yml has total 6 cases (4 cases for xenial, and 2 cases for bionic).
Here is the result on my forked repository.
https://travis-ci.org/junaruga/libpod/builds/592091305

As I got below error for bionic root case, I added it as allow failures. That's why this .travis.yml exists. :)
https://travis-ci.org/junaruga/libpod/jobs/592091311#L543

$ sudo podman run --rm -t my-fedora uname -m
ERRO[0000] Error adding network: failed to find plugin "loopback" in path [/usr/libexec/cni /usr/lib/cni /usr/local/lib/cni /opt/cni/bin] 
ERRO[0000] Error while adding to cni lo network: failed to find plugin "loopback" in path [/usr/libexec/cni /usr/lib/cni /usr/local/lib/cni /opt/cni/bin] 

I added Travis badge image to README.md that is useful to see the build status easily.
Here is the modified README.md.
https://github.com/junaruga/libpod/blob/feature/add-travis-ci/README.md

I did not add qemu cases that exist in the example #3679 (comment) to simply the cases.

Travis "addon" syntax used for this PR might not be reliable to install deb packages.
For example ruby project is using own commands to control a retry logic of the commands.
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/master/.travis.yml#L71-L89

- |-
  tool/travis_retry.sh sudo -E apt-get $travis_apt_get_options install \
    gcc-8 \

Could you review this PR?

The actual documentation to run podman on Travis CI will be later by another PR after this PR will be merged.

Thanks.

[openshift-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: junaruga
To complete the pull request process, please assign giuseppe
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @giuseppe in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[openshift-ci-robot]

Hi @junaruga. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a containers or openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[baude]

/ok-to-test

[baude]

do I read this correctly that you wish to enable testing on travis for libpod? if so, i am not supportive of this. other team-members will also weigh in.

[mheon]

Aren't we testing Ubuntu already on Cirrus?

[mheon]

Ah, I see the intent here - to verify Podman actually works in Travis. Hm.

[junaruga]

do I read this correctly that you wish to enable testing on travis for libpod?

Yes. Actually this repository'sTravis CI is already enabled. Maybe someone did it in a past time.
https://travis-ci.org/containers/libpod

if so, i am not supportive of this. other team-members will also weigh in.

Oh why? It's useful for me and other people to see examples of podman on Travis CI, and to check issue for podman deb package.
I can support it if providing stable Travis CI testing is the responsibility.
I am not familiar with the code of podman. Maybe I can not fix the issue related to podman deb package. But I am familiar with Travis CI tips.

[junaruga]

Ah, I see the intent here - to verify Podman actually works in Travis. Hm.

Yes. That's the intent. :)

[baude]

@junaruga can you tell me what you are really trying to do here? My interpretation is you want to protect regressions for debian by testing an ubuntu package that is already been built? If I understand that correctly, then this would be the wrong place to do that. The tests being run here are meant to test new code being proposed for the upstream project.

each of the tests you want to run, I believe are tested on the upstream code on ubuntu. i think what you are wanting is some sort of gating tests for ubuntu/debian. is that more accurate?

[junaruga]

each of the tests you want to run, I believe are tested on the upstream code on ubuntu. i think what you are wanting is some sort of gating tests for ubuntu/debian. is that more accurate?

Yes. right. "some sort of gating tests for ubuntu/debian" is my intent.

can you tell me what you are really trying to do here? My interpretation is you want to protect regressions for debian by testing an ubuntu package that is already been built?

I wanted to run podman and podman-compose on Travis CI for my project.
This PR's .travis.yml is to test running podman on Travis CI itself.

[junaruga]

If I understand that correctly, then this would be the wrong place to do that.

I am okay to close this PR. The motivation of the PR was @rhatdan 's comment "We would love to have this added to libpod for testing." here.
#3679 (comment)

[baude]

@junaruga he is travelling today so lets give him some time to get back and consider the proposal. im not the only vote here

[rhatdan]

@junaruga Could we do the testing you want through cirrus? We have had problems with travis in the patch causing huge delays in merging of PRs. We were experiencing that, just yesterday, on buildah and containers/image. We are paying for some testing on cirrus and tend to get much better though put.

Getting better integration between podman-compose and podman for regression testing would be nice, and getting integration into podman-machine, since those projects are taking pressure off of the core teams.

[vrothberg]

I interpreted the initial request to open a pull request that adds documention how to run podman in Travis, not to actually run it in Travis.

[junaruga]

I interpreted the initial request to open a pull request that adds documention how to run podman in Travis, not to actually run it in Travis.

@vrothberg yes right. I intended 2 PRs. One PR was for the initial request for the documentation.
Another PR (this PR) was for @rhatdan 's comment "We would love to have this added to libpod for testing.".

Could we do the testing you want through cirrus?

@rhatdan yes let me see the Cirrus code at first. I misunderstood you wanted Travis CI testing for this repository libpod. :) Thanks for the detailed explanation.

So, I would like to close this PR. I will send new PRs later.
Thanks for the reviewing, everyone.