BZ-1910319: updated paths#28919
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/XS
|
Deploy preview for osdocs ready! Built with commit 224e3c3 |
bergerhoffer
left a comment
bergerhoffer
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just two questions that we need to run by SME/QE!
| ifndef::openshift-origin[] | ||
| -a ${REG_CREDS} \ | ||
| endif::[] | ||
| --path /usr/bin/registry/darwin-amd64-opm:. \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@skrthomas So it looks like you removed the registry/ path which is good, but you also changed the name of the binary from darwin-amd64-opm to just opm.
I'm not sure if that change is appropriate or not, but that's something that I would ask @zhouying7780 to confirm.
Or maybe @adellape knows a good SME on the Operator team to ask?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just double-checked, and they should remain as darwin-amd64-opm and windows-amd64-opm for those binaries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
$ oc image extract registry.redhat.io/openshift4/ose-operator-registry:v4.6 -a ${REG_CREDS} --path /usr/bin/windows-amd64-opm:. --confirm
W0128 10:31:30.601994 176229 manifest.go:414] Chose linux/amd64 manifest from the list.
To include the manifest list digest: sha256:490035a0394c1f6aa32f193b61a28f983801ef467339729d4a724bb4b3ec7f7e, use --keep-manifest-list=true
$ oc image extract registry.redhat.io/openshift4/ose-operator-registry:v4.6 -a ${REG_CREDS} --path /usr/bin/darwin-amd64-opm:. --confirm
W0128 10:32:10.349443 176319 manifest.go:414] Chose linux/amd64 manifest from the list.
To include the manifest list digest: sha256:490035a0394c1f6aa32f193b61a28f983801ef467339729d4a724bb4b3ec7f7e, use --keep-manifest-list=true
$ ll
total 156072
-rw-r-----. 1 durant durant 67038328 Jan 15 19:30 darwin-amd64-opm
-rw-r-----. 1 durant durant 92769624 Jan 15 19:31 windows-amd64-opm
| -a ${REG_CREDS} \ | ||
| endif::[] | ||
| --path /usr/bin/registry/windows-amd64-opm:. \ | ||
| --path /usr/bin/opm:. \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same question for @zhouying7780 if the binary needs to stay windows-amd64-opm or if it should just be opm for windows.
bergerhoffer
added
the
peer-review-done
|
@skrthomas Also, do you know which OCP versions this is applicable for? |
|
@bergerhoffer 4.6/4.7 |
|
Hey @skrthomas - leave a comment here as to why you closed this PR and provide the link to the followup PRs if any. When we close PRs, also remove the milestones and labels (request the peer reviewers or anyone in the team to do so). |
|
@vikram-redhat will do! I closed this one because, in discussion with @adellape, we realized that this fix acutally needed to be in enterprise_4.5 and enterprise_4.6. Here are the links to the 2 PRs creates in place of closing this one: |
|
@vikram-redhat I don't think that I was aware that we remove labels when we close PRs, is there a reason why we'd need to do this? If it's for querying reasons, I'd think that you should be able to filter out closed ones pretty easily. But if there is a good reason, then we should communicate this around the team, because I missed the memo! |
|
@bergerhoffer it is indeed to do with querying and reporting, and it just makes it easier at the end of the release to identify everything that we did end up doing. I have mentioned this in a few of the weekly meetings (for example, 13th July), but I have neglected to add to the manual. Will do so today. |
I'm going to pretend I was on PTO that day 😉 |
5 participants
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1910319
Updating paths
Ready for QA - @zhouying7780