Allocate a Windows 2000 VM, for tier-2 (unit test) monitoring

VERIFIED WONTFIX

Status

defect
P3
normal
VERIFIED WONTFIX
10 years ago
6 years ago

People

(Reporter: sgautherie, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: need license, )

Reporter

Description

10 years ago
From 'Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning':

I wrote:
{
I might be willing to care for a W2K box (which could probably build multiple applications/versions), if there was (even a slow VM) one...
}

Mike Shaver replied:
{
If you want to be a W2K steward, that'd be great -- please file a bug
to get a VM allocated for that purpose, and cc: me!
}

Current situation on my side is:
*My (Core2 Duo) computer runs a W2K (Professional).
*I use "Visual C++ 8 Express" and "Platform SDK for Windows Server 2003 R2".
*I "regularly" build Firefox and SeaMonkey from *mozilla_central*.
 *I have mozilla-1.9.1 tree too, though I almost never (need to) compile it.
*I run the unit test suites.

So, if RelEng can give me an access to a (reference environment) W2K VM,
I guess I should be able to take care of the usual building/testing tasks.

Hopefully such a box should be able to support (at the time of writing):
*1.9.1/branch and 1.9.2/central.
*Firefox, SeaMonkey, Thunderbird;
 (maybe XulRunner or others, though I've never done it yet).

NB:
*We're interested in (build and) tests (only), not performance/Talos/etc.
*When packaged tests are available, it could even do that only. (or not)
IT, Serge is looking for a clone of win2k3sp2-vc8tools-scrubbed-ref-vm.
Assignee: nobody → server-ops
Component: Release Engineering → Server Operations
QA Contact: release → mrz
(In reply to comment #1)
> IT, Serge is looking for a clone of win2k3sp2-vc8tools-scrubbed-ref-vm.

Bleh. This is entirely wrong. Since we don't have a windows 2000 reference image you'll need to give him a fresh Windows 2000 install.
Reporter

Comment 3

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #1)
> clone of win2k3sp2-vc8tools-scrubbed-ref-vm.

Yep, just with a Windows like w2k+sp4+ur1v2 +/- ;->

(In reply to comment #2)
> we don't have a windows 2000 reference image

It might be good to build one (together), so we can reuse it as need be.
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > we don't have a windows 2000 reference image
> 
> It might be good to build one (together), so we can reuse it as need be.

Unless we're going to be running a large amount of windows 2000 machines (we aren't) this isn't worth the effort for us.
Is it a lot of work to create a ref image, if we're already creating a VM?  Being able to cleanly reimage this VM if it gets screwed up, etc. seems worthwhile, and since W2K is a supported OS for FF 3.5 I expect that QA would want to have one available as well.
(In reply to comment #5)
> Is it a lot of work to create a ref image, if we're already creating a VM? 
> Being able to cleanly reimage this VM if it gets screwed up, etc. seems
> worthwhile, and since W2K is a supported OS for FF 3.5 I expect that QA would
> want to have one available as well.

QA and Build reference platforms are pretty different. We've shared them between the two groups (except back when Rob was managing the unittest Buildbot machines in QA).

I don't see RelEng running any Windows 2000 machines - just as we don't have any 10.4 machines, or multiple linux distros. If Serge wants to create a reference image for Windows 2000 - that's totally cool, of course, but I can't see me or anyone else in releng prioritizing this above our other work when we have exactly zero Windows 2000 machines.
IT can build a w2k VM.  Please provide the spec you need for this vm.
CPU
RAM
Disk size.

I would also need a license key for this.
(In reply to comment #7)
> IT can build a w2k VM.  Please provide the spec you need for this vm.
> CPU
> RAM
> Disk size.

Given our MoCo load issues, can this VM please go on a community ESX host?


> I would also need a license key for this.
Who would provide this? MoFo?
Reporter

Comment 9

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #7)
> CPU
> RAM
> Disk size.

I'd say what a "unit test" box usually gets...
Maybe with (future) extra disk space as, if all goes well, it will build multiple object directories.
MoCo should pay for the license key, IMO.  Order it as you would a W2K license for my desktop. :)

Updated

10 years ago
Assignee: server-ops → phong
Should we use the build MSDN license for this?

Updated

10 years ago
Whiteboard: need license

Updated

10 years ago
Assignee: phong → mrz
John - do you have an MSDN license for Windows 2000?
Component: Server Operations → Release Engineering

Updated

10 years ago
Assignee: mrz → nobody
QA Contact: mrz → release
Reporter

Updated

10 years ago
Flags: wanted1.9.2?
John - please respond with regards to comment #12 if we are going to provide a license.

Serge please assign this to yourself since this is not going to be a releng VM, and we would like to move it out of our queue.
It should be assigned to someone who can allocate such a VM, which is unlikely to be Serge.
Found during triage, assigning to joduinn to determine where we are getting a license from.
Assignee: nobody → joduinn
Shaver, Serge;

Urgh - what a messy bug. Several questions here - how should we proceed?:

0) Microsoft EOL'd win2000 in june2005 according to http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&x=22&y=7&p1=7274. I do not see any win2000 software on msdn, so cant get you a license key for win2000. I can get plenty of win2003, win2008, xp, vista, win2k3, win7, winCE, etc, etc, but not win2000. If we explicitly *need* win2000, then we'll need to start looking on ebay, etc... How should we proceed?

1) When this VM is created, it should not be on the production MoCo RelEng ESX hosts, given the load/space issues there. Depending on who will need access to this VM, should this go on a community ESX server or on dev-vmware01?

2) As this is a fresh install, not from ref image, there will be no MoCo specific accounts or ssh keys installed on this VM.

3) After the VM and o.s. are setup, I think we should wait for separate-build-from-unittest as that is ready in staging, nearly ready in production and would greatly simplify what needs to be installed on this new VM. I dont this would be a delaying factor, but would recommend going this way. $0.02.
Reporter

Comment 17

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #16)

> 0) Microsoft EOL'd win2000 in june2005 according to
> 1) When this VM is created, it should not be on the production MoCo RelEng ESX
> 2) As this is a fresh install, not from ref image, there will be no MoCo

(I have no specific answers to these, as long as I can access the VM.)

> 3) After the VM and o.s. are setup, I think we should wait for

Yes, that's what I wrote in comment 0.

Current (improved) situation about packaged tests is:
*FF: run fine (manually) on my local.
*SM: build+tests are uploaded now, I'm about to try running them locally.
*TB: I filed a bug to upload too, but there may be other issues...

I would like to be able to compile too, but this is not a priority (anymore),
and we can probably do without that.
(In reply to comment #16)
> 0) Microsoft EOL'd win2000 in june2005 according to
> http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&x=22&y=7&p1=7274. I do not see
> any win2000 software on msdn, so cant get you a license key for win2000. I can
> get plenty of win2003, win2008, xp, vista, win2k3, win7, winCE, etc, etc, but
> not win2000. If we explicitly *need* win2000, then we'll need to start looking
> on ebay, etc... How should we proceed?

No progress here, apart from people sending emails asking for Win2000 media we can use. :-(
(In reply to comment #18)
> (In reply to comment #16)
> > 0) Microsoft EOL'd win2000 in june2005 according to
> > http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&x=22&y=7&p1=7274. I do not see
> > any win2000 software on msdn, so cant get you a license key for win2000. I can
> > get plenty of win2003, win2008, xp, vista, win2k3, win7, winCE, etc, etc, but
> > not win2000. If we explicitly *need* win2000, then we'll need to start looking
> > on ebay, etc... How should we proceed?
> 
> No progress here, apart from people sending emails asking for Win2000 media we
> can use. :-(

Still blocked here. Where/how can we get a Win2000 license?
Reporter

Comment 20

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #16)

Ftr,

> http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&x=22&y=7&p1=7274

{
Products Released	General Availability Date	Mainstream Support Retired	Extended Support Retired

Windows 2000 Server	3/31/2000	6/30/2005	7/13/2010
}


http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx
{
Desktop Operating Systems	Date of General Availability	Direct OEM and Retail License Availability (end date)	System Builder License Availability (end date)

Windows 2000 Professional	March 31, 2000	March 31, 2004	March 31, 2005
}

*****

Fwiw, here are 2 replies I got:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.apps.seamonkey/browse_thread/thread/1e2ef2938aa1be67/b0e974c85d15d056
(In reply to comment #19)
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > (In reply to comment #16)
> > > 0) Microsoft EOL'd win2000 in june2005 according to
> > > http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&x=22&y=7&p1=7274. I do not see
> > > any win2000 software on msdn, so cant get you a license key for win2000. I can
> > > get plenty of win2003, win2008, xp, vista, win2k3, win7, winCE, etc, etc, but
> > > not win2000. If we explicitly *need* win2000, then we'll need to start looking
> > > on ebay, etc... How should we proceed?
> > 
> > No progress here, apart from people sending emails asking for Win2000 media we
> > can use. :-(
> 
> Still blocked here. Where/how can we get a Win2000 license?

Still blocked here. Found this, but dont know if that is what is needed:

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft%C2%AE-Windows%C2%AE-2000-Professional-Edition/dp/B0006HMWO4/ref=dp_cp_ob_sw_title_1
Reporter

Comment 22

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #21)
> http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft%C2%AE-Windows%C2%AE-2000-Professional-Edition/dp/B0006HMWO4/ref=dp_cp_ob_sw_title_1

"Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional
Price:  	$125.95"

From my p-o-v, it looks high priced for an "obsolete" OS.
Yet, a W2K-Pro should do just fine (unless a W2K-Server would be needed?).

Of course, finding an old MSDN (free) disk/license would (have) be better :-|
Serge, what exactly do you need?
Reporter

Comment 24

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #23)

(Ftr, I asked Tanner in bug 302473 comment 12.)

> Serge, what exactly do you need?

RelEng team is willing to allocate a Win2000 VM but they miss a W2K license :-/
Would you have one they could use or know where to get one?
(Your bug 302473 comment 11 made me thought you might...)
Reporter

Updated

10 years ago
Depends on: 523268
does this really depend on bug 523268 or is it just a related bug?
Reporter

Comment 26

10 years ago
This bug is stuck.
Bug 523268 would be like a (learning) step toward this bug.

Obviously, allocating the VMs themselves is unrelated from a technical point of view.
Only the following build and run parts would be related.
If we ever end up getting a license, we could put this VM on the 650 Castro VM Host and include in the pool of slaves that are being set up in support of bug 463262.  As is understood in 463262 we wouldn't be rebuilding, rather, we would be running tests on existing nightlies to test shipped code on old platforms.  Moving to future until we can get a license as this bug cannot progress any further without it.
Assignee: joduinn → nobody
Component: Release Engineering → Release Engineering: Future
Depends on: 463262
Can we close out this bug as WONTFIX? 

Per comment#16,18,19,20 its not so easy to get a license because the OS has been desupported by Microsoft. Also, see URL field for discussion on dropping Firefox support for some older OS, including Win2k. Also, bug#488585 is tracking related installer warnings.
Closing as WONTFIX, because this OS has been desupported by Microsoft.

Please reopen if anyone actually needs this, and has a spare Win2000 license for us to use.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Moving closed Future bugs into Release Engineering in preparation for removing the Future component.
Component: Release Engineering: Future → Release Engineering
Reporter

Comment 31

7 years ago
V.WontFix, per bug 699247.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Depends on: 699247
Flags: wanted1.9.2?
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.