templates: remove /usr/share/containers/oci/hooks.d from crio config#1314
Conversation
|
It sounds like people were using this hook directory on traditional RHEL systems (since it's writable there), and given Maybe the simplest thing is to merge this PR, and then also do |
That sounds sane to me, not sure if anyone has been installing custom cri-o hooks (especially in /usr/share). @lsm5 wdyt? |
|
/retest |
|
this PR is making a change to something that was recently added in https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/1299/files @haircommander PTAL /hold |
|
I am fine with it if it works with @zvonkok |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we already have /etc/containers/oci/hooks.d as a default in cri-o (as of cri-o/cri-o@16beb92), I'd just comment out all of hooks_dir so we can allow cri-o to set the default as it sees fit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think its a good idea. I'd rather have MCD be the single source of CRI-O configs rather then relying on CRI-O defaults. Other components might use this config to set their own hooks. Also CRI-O might be tested with oci-systemd-hook installed (which is not the case for FCOS and currently happening on RHCOS), so the test results from CRI-O suite might be inconvincing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
per conversations with @cgwalters we decided to keep the templated configs as slim as possible. If other components use this value, they can import the value from cri-o/cri-o/config, which we keep public for that very use case. Removing /usr/share/containers/oci/hooks.d will remove the oci-systemd-hook anyway (as it's only shipped there, and also being removed on rhcos), so after this PR the tests will be the same, regardless of whether this field is commented out or not.
my comment isn't necessarily blocking, but we've set the idiom in the other fields to use cri-o defaults when possible, and in this situation it is possible, so I'm still pushing to follow it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, in that case it should be done in a different PR (and moved to shared masters/workers templates)
/retest |
|
@haircommander @vrutkovs relevant bug below: |
|
@vrutkovs: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1781019, which is invalid:
Comment 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. |
|
/retest |
|
/bugzilla refresh The requirements for Bugzilla bugs have changed, recalculating validity. |
|
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1781019, which is invalid:
Comment 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. |
|
/retest |
|
@vrutkovs: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. 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. |
|
Done |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done. Updated commit message too
Its no longer available since RHCOS doesn't install `oci-systemd-hooks`
15f10cc to
58e334a
Compare
|
/lgtm |
|
Also adding a
Reference? It's listed explicitly in the RHCOS manifest I believe because we want to support people doing a "lift and shift" of VMs into containers (where systemd runs in the container) and the like. Its existence also makes things messier here...I think we probably need both values in the configuration? |
|
/retest https://gitlab.cee.redhat.com/coreos/redhat-coreos/merge_requests/764 actually dropped thus: |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LorbusChris, mrunalp, runcom, vrutkovs 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 |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.3 |
|
@haircommander: new pull request created: #1329 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. |
|
I saw mention in here that I opened https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807245 a while back and am trying to get some clarity on what's going on. |
- What I did
Removed /usr/share/containers/oci/hooks.d from CRI-O config. This folder is not available on RHEL7 hosts when CRI-O is being installed.
This dir is provided by
oci-systemd-hook(if I understood correctly), however it is planned to be dropped during 4.3 lifecycle. This PR would ensure CRI-O is configured correctly in preparation to that- How to verify it
Run RHEL7 scaleup - it should pass
- Description for the changelog
/usr/share/containers/oci/hooks.d is no longer being used as a source of CRI-O hooks.
/cc @mtnbikenc