Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>
---
 .gitlab-ci.yml | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
index d1609c260d..5e61de3ad8 100644
--- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
+++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
@@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ s390x-debian-10-container:
     NAME: debian-10-cross-s390x
 
 aarch64-debian-sid-container:
-  extends: .container_job
+  extends: .container_optional_job
   variables:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-aarch64
 
@@ -275,12 +275,12 @@ armv7l-debian-sid-container:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-armv7l
 
 i686-debian-sid-container:
-  extends: .container_job
+  extends: .container_optional_job
   variables:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-i686
 
 mips64el-debian-sid-container:
-  extends: .container_job
+  extends: .container_optional_job
   variables:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-mips64el
 
@@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ ppc64le-debian-sid-container:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-ppc64le
 
 s390x-debian-sid-container:
-  extends: .container_job
+  extends: .container_optional_job
   variables:
     NAME: debian-sid-cross-s390x
 
-- 
2.31.1

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 02:41:48PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
>  s390x-debian-sid-container:
> -  extends: .container_job
> +  extends: .container_optional_job
>    variables:
>      NAME: debian-sid-cross-s390x

This essentially removes coverage for these architectures in a
permanent fashion by sweeping failures under the rug, which is not an
acceptable way to deal with a temporary failure IMO.

I'm working on a different solution which would retain fully coverage
while still working around the current issues with Debian sid.

NACK

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 02:41:31AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 02:41:48PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
> >  s390x-debian-sid-container:
> > -  extends: .container_job
> > +  extends: .container_optional_job
> >    variables:
> >      NAME: debian-sid-cross-s390x
> 
> This essentially removes coverage for these architectures in a
> permanent fashion by sweeping failures under the rug, which is not an
> acceptable way to deal with a temporary failure IMO.
> 
> I'm working on a different solution which would retain fully coverage
> while still working around the current issues with Debian sid.
> 
> NACK

If I understand this patch correctly it will only mark building the
container optional, the libvirt build would sill be mandatory so I don't
see any issue here with coverage. We would simply reuse the latest
working container to build libvirt.

Pavel