Documentation not being generated

[tknopp]

Not sure if this ever worked with Github actions but right now it fails:

https://github.com/JuliaGraphics/Gtk.jl/runs/2054338675?check_suite_focus=true

[timholy]

See https://github.com/julia-actions/MassInstallAction.jl/blob/master/demos/MaintenanceDec2020/maintenance.jl for all kinds of goodies for updating most/all of the infrastructure supporting a package.

[tknopp]

yes, but does that here help? I mean the infrastructure is already up to date ins't it? The error is

xvfb-run: error: Xvfb failed to start
192
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

[giordano]

@SaschaMann any clue why xvfb doesn't work anymore?

[SaschaMann]

No idea, sorry.

I don't really know xvfb, perhaps check actions/virtual-environments for recent updates to its package?

I've had builds fail for random non-Julia reasons before due errors in the ubuntu packages. Usually those fixed themselves after a week when a new image was rolled out.

[giordano]

The first builds worked, then it started to fail without us changing anything 😕 So yeah, changes in the environments of the runners may be the culprit here.

[tknopp]

I have re-run the actions and now it builds...

[giordano]

@SaschaMann the weird thing is that xvfb-run works without issues in julia-runtest, but it fails in julia-docdeploy (yes, it failed again: https://github.com/JuliaGraphics/Gtk.jl/pull/569/checks?check_run_id=2070269831). Is there anything different between the workflows?

[giordano]

It also goes without saying that in tmate it works flawless

[SaschaMann]

I don't think so? Not sure though. The jobs run on identical GHA runner versions and in identical virtual environments.

These are the commands that are executed in those actions:

• https://github.com/julia-actions/julia-docdeploy/blob/master/action.yml#L15-L40
• https://github.com/julia-actions/julia-runtest/blob/master/action.yml#L27-L56

In the test job in the workflow in this repo, julia-buildpkg, which runs Pkg.build(), does not have the xvfb-run prefix. In the Documentation job, the instantiation (Pkg.develop(PackageSpec(path=pwd())); Pkg.instantiate()') is run with the xvfb-run prefix. It's a bit of a stretch, but maybe there's some interaction that causes issues during building/instantiating the package?

As I said, I don't know xvfb-run at all, I'm purely guessing based on the commands that are executed in the actions/workflows.