Bug 42034 - Test case 90_ucsschool.22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference fails
Test case 90_ucsschool.22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference fails
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: UCS@school
Classification: Unclassified
Component: ucs-test
UCS@school 4.1 R2
Other Linux
: P5 normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: UCS@school maintainers
:
Depends on:
Blocks: 40321
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2016-08-19 06:41 CEST by Stefan Gohmann
Modified: 2019-02-05 21:43 CET (History)
0 users

See Also:
What kind of report is it?: Development Internal
What type of bug is this?: ---
Who will be affected by this bug?: ---
How will those affected feel about the bug?: ---
User Pain:
Enterprise Customer affected?:
School Customer affected?:
ISV affected?:
Waiting Support:
Flags outvoted (downgraded) after PO Review:
Ticket number:
Bug group (optional):
Max CVSS v3 score:


Attachments
ucs-test-22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference.log (1.75 MB, text/plain)
2016-08-19 06:41 CEST, Stefan Gohmann
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-19 06:41:30 CEST
Created attachment 7899 [details]
ucs-test-22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference.log

The test case 90_ucsschool.22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference fails:

http://jenkins.knut.univention.de:8080/job/UCSschool%204.1/job/UCSschool%204.1%20(R2)%20Multiserver/205/SambaVersion=s4/testReport/90_ucsschool/22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference/test/

*** END TIME: 2016-08-18 14:25:52 ***
*** TEST DURATION (H:MM:SS.ms): 2:30:12.385818 ***
*** END *** -15 ***

The timeout is currently set to 9000 seconds. I guess we should increase the timeout or should it be much faster?
Comment 1 Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-19 09:51:28 CEST
Another issue, maybe we could wait until the printer is available:

[2016-08-18 23:11:00.551711] *** ['smbclient', '//12.176.224.250/Marktplatz', '-U', 'p0s94etqfl%univention', '-c', 'put /tmp/tmpiWoDJc tmpiWoDJc']
(2016-08-18 23:11:00.956742) Domain=[AUTOTEST207] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
(2016-08-18 23:11:00.961241) putting file /tmp/tmpiWoDJc as \tmpiWoDJc (0,0 kb/s) (average -nan kb/s)
[2016-08-18 23:11:00.971114] Checking print mode ........................................
[2016-08-18 23:11:00.971146] *** ['smbclient', '//12.176.224.250/szp6zld7um', '-U', 'p0s94etqfl%univention', '-c', 'print /tmp/tmpfKRWns']
(2016-08-18 23:11:01.363262) Domain=[AUTOTEST207] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
[2016-08-18 23:11:01.373035] tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
[2016-08-18 23:11:01.374247] FAIL .... smbclient print result (1), expected (0)
[2016-08-18 23:11:01.374264] ### FAIL ###
[2016-08-18 23:11:01.374274] smbclient print result (1), expected (0)
Comment 2 Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-19 13:53:50 CEST
First changes (r71746):

* 22_computerroom_two_rooms_settings_interference: Increase the
  timeout to 14400 seconds (Bug #42034)
* essential/computerroom.py: Let's try to wait a little bit longer for
  the CUPS and Samba server (Bug #42034)
Comment 3 Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-23 13:34:13 CEST
I see two printer related falls:

1. s3

[2016-08-22 20:48:59.927123] *** ['smbclient', '//11.146.217.166/Marktplatz', '-U', 'fm11pxtoxy%univention', '-c', 'put /tmp/tmpJMGt6c tmpJMGt6c']
(2016-08-22 20:49:00.310182) Domain=[AUTOTEST202] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
(2016-08-22 20:49:00.322734) putting file /tmp/tmpJMGt6c as \tmpJMGt6c (0,0 kb/s) (average -nan kb/s)
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.324992] Checking print mode ........................................
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.325013] *** ['smbclient', '//11.146.217.166/zvnhr1u4ld', '-U', 'fm11pxtoxy%univention', '-c', 'print /tmp/tmpy6ylCF']
(2016-08-22 20:49:00.717242) Domain=[AUTOTEST202] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.720161] tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.720180] FAIL .... smbclient print result (1), expected (0)
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.720189] ### FAIL ###
[2016-08-22 20:49:00.720197] smbclient print result (1), expected (0)

2. s4-school-only

[2016-08-22 22:00:09.598673] Checking print mode ........................................
[2016-08-22 22:00:09.598694] *** ['smbclient', '//11.161.233.250/PDFDrucker', '-U', 'qg5odxddnr%univention', '-c', 'print /tmp/tmpAs9BAj']
(2016-08-22 22:00:09.995219) Domain=[AUTOTEST204] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
[2016-08-22 22:00:10.022713] tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED
[2016-08-22 22:00:10.022752] FAIL .... smbclient print result (1), expected (0)
[2016-08-22 22:00:10.022763] ### FAIL ###
[2016-08-22 22:00:10.022772] smbclient print result (1), expected (0)

In some other environments the test case fails like described in Bug #41278.
Comment 4 Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-24 06:48:53 CEST
[2016-08-23 20:47:13.504735] *** ['udm', 'shares/printer', 'create', '--position', 'cn=printers,ou=bim0jd,dc=autotest202,dc=local', '--set', 'name=nlwfxo5y8h', '--set', 'spoolHost=slave2022.autotest202.local', '--set', 'uri="file:// /tmp/nlwfxo5y8h.printer"', '--set', 'model=None', '--binddn', 'uid=Administrator,cn=users,dc=autotest202,dc=local', '--bindpwd', 'univention']
[2016-08-23 20:47:17.640419] Object created: cn=nlwfxo5y8h,cn=printers,ou=bim0jd,dc=autotest202,dc=local

[...]

[2016-08-23 20:47:23.744258] *** ['smbclient', '//12.27.195.197/nlwfxo5y8h', '-U', 'm5giolcbdh%univention', '-c', 'print /tmp/tmpA1Dn_C']
(2016-08-23 20:47:24.166533) Domain=[AUTOTEST202] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.3.7-Debian]
[2016-08-23 20:47:24.169395] tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME

The printer is checked only five seconds after creating the printer. We have at least to wait for the replication postrun: r71871
Comment 5 Stefan Gohmann univentionstaff 2016-08-25 06:03:35 CEST
The test case is now killed after 4 hours at least if no other error occurred. That is much too long. I've now disabled the test case and we have to re-think what we want to test and how we could reach it.

What I understand from the test case is that we have 2 rooms and 24 status. We are changing 24 settings for room2 if we change one setting in room1. So we have 24x24 changes and tests. My suggestion is that we start with 5 possible settings for room1 and we could change every 24 settings for room2. That would be 5x24 settings. We also could change more settings for room2 at once so that we have only 5x5 combinations. But I don't know enough about the history of the problems we had in this area.

These are the possible settings:

rules = ['none', 'Kein Internet', 'Unbeschränkt', 'custom']
printmodes = ['default', 'all', 'none']
sharemodes = ['all', 'home']

The five settings could be:
 0, 0, 0
 0, 1, 1
 1, 2, 1
 2, 0, 0
 3, 2, 1
Comment 6 Sönke Schwardt-Krummrich univentionstaff 2019-02-05 21:43:04 CET
This issue has been filled against UCS@school 4.1 (R2). The maintenance with
bug and security fixes for UCS@school 4.1 (R2) has ended on 5th of April 2018.

Customers still on UCS 4.1 are encouraged to update to UCS 4.3 (or later). 
Please contact your partner or Univention for any questions.

If this issue still occurs in newer UCS versions, please use "Clone this bug"
or simply reopen the issue. In this case please provide detailed information on
how this issue is affecting you.