Bug 1951084: remove mounts.conf again, but patch buildah change needed to make transient mounts work for us#239
Conversation
I was able to pull in the containers/buildah#3117 version of the buildah change and also verify that host entitlements still work |
5db1a99 to
8ceff95
Compare
|
I've redone this PR to vendor in the specific buildah commit that pulls in the change I verified in #239 (comment) |
adambkaplan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/hold
We are rebasing buildah in a separate PR, waiting for this to merge first.
Yep was just thinking this AM that when the 1.20.0 bump merges, this PR could lose its bump buildah commit |
I was incorrect. containers/buildah#3117 is NOT in v1.20.0 That said, still need to rebase, then add new bump. |
8ceff95 to
078a2c6
Compare
|
/hold cancel |
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| allMounts := util.SortMounts(append(append(append(append(append(volumes, builtins...), secretMounts...), bindFileMounts...), specMounts...), sysfsMount...)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is the buildah fix we need that is not in the latest buildah tag, v1.20.0
|
/retest |
|
@gabemontero: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1951084, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: DetailsIn response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/assign @adambkaplan minimally for approval please let me know @adambkaplan if you just want to approve this PR and have me solicit review from other members of @openshift/openshift-team-build-api thanks |
|
@xiuwang - verification for this will entail
|
| return mounts | ||
| } | ||
| mounts = append(mounts, fmt.Sprintf("%s:/run/secrets/%s:rw,nodev,noexec,nosuid", tmpDir, pathEnd)) | ||
| return mounts |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm ... curious that even compiled ... thanks @nalind
078a2c6 to
0da2bcd
Compare
adambkaplan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/approve
Mostly nits, otherwise in good shape.
| // since the presence of dir secret is not a given, we won't log this a V(0) | ||
| log.V(0).Infof("Red Hat subscription content will not be available in this build: failed to stat directory %s: %v", path, err) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Meant to log this at V(4)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
part of next push
| log.V(0).Infof("Red Hat subscription content will not be available in this build: failed to stat directory %s: %v", path, err) | ||
| return mounts | ||
| } | ||
| if !st.IsDir() && st.Mode()&os.ModeSymlink == 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
space for readability? (looks like we are doing a bitwise AND here)
| if !st.IsDir() && st.Mode()&os.ModeSymlink == 0 { | |
| if !st.IsDir() && (st.Mode() & os.ModeSymlink == 0) { |
go fmt may remove my parens in the suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
go fmt leaves the parens but removes the spaces you added @adambkaplan
if !st.IsDir() && (st.Mode()&os.ModeSymlink == 0) {
that ^^ will be part of next push
| github.com/Nvveen/Gotty v0.0.0-20120604004816-cd527374f1e5 // indirect | ||
| github.com/containers/buildah v1.20.0 | ||
| github.com/containers/common v0.35.3 | ||
| github.com/containers/buildah v1.20.1-0.20210331202609-d29b04dba7fa |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As @nalind pointed out in slack, we now have a v1.20.1 tag upstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
part of next push
0da2bcd to
8d766bd
Compare
|
updates pushed @adambkaplan @nalind thanks note what |
|
e2e-aws hit that new kubelet panic the node team is tracking (per recent slack messages I've seen) /retest |
|
/refresh |
|
@gabemontero: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
Launched a cluster and tested entitlement build, no warning anymore. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: adambkaplan, gabemontero, wewang58 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/label qe-approved |
|
e2e-aws job failed with clusteroperator/ingress should not change condition/Available |
|
/retest e2e-aws |
|
@wewang58: The
Use
DetailsIn response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/test e2e-aws |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@gabemontero: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1951084 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. DetailsIn response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/cherrypick release-4.7 |
|
@gabemontero: #239 failed to apply on top of branch "release-4.7": DetailsIn response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
@nalind @bparees the "meets min" change to buildah that allows host entitlements to work for openshift builds, but without a mounts.conf file in the builder image, and warning message when we run on rhcos
containers/buildah#3117 is a slightly different take
I'll next see about porting that in, and verify on our UPI with entitlements cluster