Add ignition 2.22.0 to core repo in azure linux#15516
Add ignition 2.22.0 to core repo in azure linux#15516SumitJenaHCL wants to merge 17 commits intomicrosoft:3.0-devfrom
Conversation
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
Packaging
specs-extended
Buddy Build has passed. |
SumitJenaHCL
force-pushed
the
topic_ignition
branch
from
e25be60 to
cfedc75
Compare
Added a newline at the end of the file to comply with formatting standards.
Removed conditional builds for various architectures and platforms in the ignition.spec file.
SumitJenaHCL
force-pushed
the
topic_ignition
branch
from
e2d5698 to
3ebaff4
Compare
sandeepkarambelkar
changed the title
SumitJenaHCL
changed the title
|
Buddy Buid along with go-rpm-macros - https://dev.azure.com/mariner-org/mariner/_build/results?buildId=1032784&view=results |
Changed the selinuxRelabel flag from true to false in LDFLAGS.
|
Ignition is outputting in runtime: Ignition was not built properly, seems to be coming from: https://github.com/flatcar/ignition/blob/f64e3b645d1a64d2c2dd58346ddb16aa711fa6fd/internal/version/version.go. Can you please investigate further and fix? |
Updated build commands for ignition and ignition-validate to include linker flags.
SumitJenaHCL
changed the title
|
Is the go-rpm-macros move from SPECS EXTENDED to SPECS approved by the same ship room? |
|
Would it make sense to rename this package from ignition to ignition-flatcar, given the heavy patchset that Flatcar carries? https://github.com/flatcar/scripts/blob/stable-4459.2.2/sdk_container/src/third_party/coreos-overlay/sys-apps/ignition/files/README.md |
|
|
||
| This package contains a tool for validating Ignition configurations. | ||
|
|
||
| ############## validate-redistributable subpackage ############## |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why keep this comment when we dont carry the redist bits?
|
|
||
| %build | ||
| export LDFLAGS="-X github.com/coreos/ignition/v2/internal/version.Raw=%{version} -X github.com/coreos/ignition/v2/internal/distro.selinuxRelabel=false " | ||
| %if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 8 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we carry the rhel specific logic?
| @@ -0,0 +1,709 @@ | |||
| %bcond_with check | |||
|
|
|||
| %global ignedgecommit a2587490b2a9a215ad12cf15866025efbe027552 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we remove given that we are not building the edge subpackage?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure. We had kept it if we want to add it later. Keeping it doesn't harm.
We will remove for now and will add when we decide to add edge subpackage.
|
Still seeing: [ 5.742334] ignition[993]: INFO : Ignition was not built properly |
I can see that you have not picked latest ignition spec in your branch. I use your branch for building the flatcar image. Mainly following lines have required fixes - echo "Building ignition..." Can you try by picking up the latest changes? |
3 participants
Merge Checklist
All boxes should be checked before merging the PR (just tick any boxes which don't apply to this PR)
*-staticsubpackages, etc.) have had theirReleasetag incremented../cgmanifest.json,./toolkit/scripts/toolchain/cgmanifest.json,.github/workflows/cgmanifest.json)./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/data/licenses.json,./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSES-MAP.md,./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSE-EXCEPTIONS.PHOTON)*.signatures.jsonfilessudo make go-tidy-allandsudo make go-test-coveragepassSummary
What does the PR accomplish, why was it needed?
This PR is to add package ignition to SPECS.
Change Log
Does this affect the toolchain?
NO
Associated issues
Links to CVEs
Test Methodology