main rejects a moving runner label since 52ad8549e0, because ubuntu-latest moved to 26.04 in the middle of run 39166850273 and every job that landed on the new image met a different OS. 9bdecaa794 pinned the three places on this branch that still carried the moving label, but the matrix generator was a fourth and kept emitting it for every amd64 row.
It was missed for the reason that commit names: the updater of b055eece05 raises a bare runs-on: ubuntu-NN.NN and leaves everything else alone, and here the label lives in a Python dict rather than on a runs-on line. That is the same blind spot 9bdecaa794 describes for the architecture ternary of call-images-build-ci.yml, which it also had to raise by hand. tests/lint/repository/test_workflow_runner_pinned.py does not reach this file either: it passed with ubuntu-latest in place.
The drift is visible in the runs. On this fork ubuntu-latest resolves to 24.04, whose system Python is 3.12, while main requests 26.04 and runs 3.14, and .github/workflows/README.md documents 26.04 for amd64. The branch is uniformly about twice as slow per ansible task as main at every percentile, and the interpreter is one of three candidates for that alongside the new controller-side code and the fork-versus-upstream difference. Pinning the generator makes the platforms comparable, which is what lets that question be answered at all.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Both architectures were claimed to work and only one was ever exercised. The
deploy matrix now carries an architecture the way it carries mode, tor, distro
and filesystem, so every run proves both.
A job cannot ask for an architecture the way it asks for a distro, because the
architecture is the machine rather than something the job installs on it. The
matrix therefore carries a runner label and `runs-on` reads it, and an
architecture without a label in RUNNERS is a build error rather than a row that
lands on the wrong hardware and still reports green. assert_architecture.sh
checks the runner it actually got, because a label that stops resolving to
arm64 would otherwise go unnoticed forever.
Assignment is rotation, not chance: two architectures against five distros and
fifteen distro/filesystem positions are coprime enough that every combination
comes round. A role narrows the pool through `architectures` in its
meta/services.yml; without one it takes whatever the rotation hands it. An
empty intersection aborts instead of silently removing the role from the run.
Images are built per architecture and pushed under an architecture-suffixed
tag, then merged into the plain tag by manifest_all.sh; pushing the plain tag
from both builds would let the last one win and send half the rows to the wrong
platform. cleanup.sh now protects the `ci-<sha>-<architecture>` children of a
protected tag, because the plain tag is an index over them and deleting a child
leaves it unpullable on that platform.
label.py is split out of axes.py, which the 500-line limit no longer fits.
Writing a job title and reading one back belong together: a retrigger that
recovers an axis wrongly replays a different deploy than the one that failed,
and a drifting artifact name makes the failure reporter download nothing. The
leading `.*` in LABEL_RE is greedy on purpose so it anchors on the last mode
glyph; a reusable-workflow caller path carries a glyph of its own, and
test_selection.py guards the case.
Verified: 313 unit tests and 48 subtests across utils/github/variant,
utils/roles and cli/meta/ci. Locally, a deploy pinned to arm64 reaches ok=1444
and its image builds log aarch64-linux-gnu paths.
Not verified here: actionlint over the seven changed workflows, and a full
`make test`. The matrix doubles the row count, so runtime and runner
availability change for every CI run from here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
A run-wide draw proved one distribution and said nothing about the other four, while reporting green. Both are matrix-row axes now, assigned by the same deterministic rotation mode and tor already use, so one sweep exercises every distribution and every filesystem.
The two read the row's position like an odometer, the distro as the low digit. Turning both on the position directly covers only n of the n x m pairs whenever the pools are the same length, and no sweep unlocks it.
Both are part of a row's identity: glyphs in the job label, columns in the plan table, shards in the artifact name. Both are selectable through %distro and /filesystem, and a retrigger replays the distro off a failed title. It leaves the filesystem out, because a title states the kind the matrix assigned and a deploy may have fallen back from it.
A row's filesystem is a preference unless a human names it, on the run or in a token. Reading the matrix's own narrowing as a demand would fail rows for every transient condition the applying step is built to tolerate.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
kevinveenbirkenbachandClaude Opus 5