Link to Julia 1.7 Docs PDF 404's

[logankilpatrick]

Per a discussion in Discorse, the link to the PDF of the docs 404s: https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/

It looks like this is due to a CI failure: https://github.com/JuliaLang/docs.julialang.org/runs/4402414711?check_suite_focus=true

[logankilpatrick]

This is the last releases build that passed: https://github.com/JuliaLang/docs.julialang.org/actions/runs/1518462133 (3 days ago)

[logankilpatrick]

One possible issue, a dep version bump. The repo does not have a Project.toml file so it installs the latest versions it needs which could be breaking

Edit: Not the issue, the project file is getting cached somewhere

Edit Edit: Maybe related to this: 4486567?

[logankilpatrick]

@KristofferC @fredrikekre any ideas here?

[fredrikekre]

Most likely some new part of the doc doesn't compile in tex. (I believe this happened months ago so I don't think it is useful to just look at recent commits.)

[ViralBShah]

We should test the existence of the pdf as part of the release process, if possible. I am wondering if we can detect that the pdf generation failed and not include the pdf link in the documentation.

[ViralBShah]

I tried the make pdf, but it's quite difficult to debug the output. I'm uploading the generated log file here.

TheJuliaLanguage.log

[ViralBShah]

Might #43342 be a possible culprit?

[DilumAluthge]

We should test the existence of the pdf as part of the release process, if possible. I am wondering if we can detect that the pdf generation failed and not include the pdf link in the documentation.

How long does the PDF take to build? Should we add a Buildkite job (https://github.com/JuliaCI/julia-buildkite) for it?

Normally, I would never recommend that we add a Buildkite job if the same thing can be accomplished with GitHub Actions. However, in this specific case, the job (PDF docs for Base Julia) is very much within the scope of Base Julia CI, so I would not object to adding this to Buildkite.

[ViralBShah]

A few minutes, I think. It's definitely within the scope of Base Julia, and needs tons of tex packages installed on the system. I suppose it could be made part of the doctests and then we can fail the doctests if the pdf build fails.

[DilumAluthge]

needs tons of tex packages installed on the system

We would just build a rootfs image (https://github.com/JuliaCI/rootfs-images) with the necessary dependencies.

A few minutes, I think.

A few minutes is quick enough that we can just add this to the doctests and run it on every PR.

[DilumAluthge]

Is it actually just a few minutes, though? Looks like the last successful run took more than 30 minutes: https://github.com/JuliaLang/docs.julialang.org/actions/runs/576633576

[DilumAluthge]

Also, note that the last time the nightly PDF built successfully was 10 months ago, so that's probably where you would want to look to find the breakage.