Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ci(*): publish oci-tar-builder binary in the ci #547

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Nov 18, 2024

Conversation

Mossaka
Copy link
Member

@Mossaka Mossaka commented Apr 3, 2024

closes #524

I didn't like the fact that the published artifacts has prefixed name containerd-shim- which doesn't really fit the purpose of the oci-tar-builder.

The oci-tar-builder binary is built for each Linux, Windows and Macos-x86_64 and Macos-arm64

@jsturtevant
Copy link
Contributor

I was thinking #524 would be part of the release CI as well. Would we want to sign it too?

@Mossaka
Copy link
Member Author

Mossaka commented Apr 3, 2024

I was thinking #524 would be part of the release CI as well.

Ah yea I intend to work on another PR to add the release of the bianry as part of the release ci.

Would we want to sign it too?

sure :)

@jsturtevant
Copy link
Contributor

I didn't like the fact that the published artifacts has prefixed name containerd-shim- which doesn't really fit the purpose of the oci-tar-builder.

I think I have a preference for modify the build action to handle this verses having a separate file and process. This would give the same steps for the signing too

@jprendes
Copy link
Collaborator

jprendes commented Apr 8, 2024

I didn't like the fact that the published artifacts has prefixed name containerd-shim- which doesn't really fit the purpose of the oci-tar-builder.

I think I have a preference for modify the build action to handle this verses having a separate file and process. This would give the same steps for the signing too

I agree with both of these comments.
I would like the build action to handle both cases. We could either:

  • have a flag in the build action to conditionally add the containerd-shim- prefix, or
  • just drop the prefix, and release unprefixed artifacts for the shims as well.

I prefer the first option. I would even defer that logic to the makefile, which already has similar logic.

@Mossaka Mossaka marked this pull request as draft April 16, 2024 20:24
jprendes
jprendes previously approved these changes Nov 18, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@jprendes jprendes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Signed-off-by: Jiaxiao (mossaka) Zhou <[email protected]>
@Mossaka Mossaka marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2024 22:23
Copy link
Collaborator

@jprendes jprendes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

I would have a slight preference towards the musl version instead of gnu, but it's not a big deal.

Also, should we include this in release.yml as well?

@Mossaka
Copy link
Member Author

Mossaka commented Nov 18, 2024

Also, should we include this in release.yml as well?

I am hoping the release.yml should JUST WORK https://github.com/containerd/runwasi/blob/main/.github/workflows/release.yml#L19

@Mossaka Mossaka merged commit 63043f1 into containerd:main Nov 18, 2024
71 checks passed
@Mossaka Mossaka deleted the pub-oci-tar-builder branch November 18, 2024 23:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create Release binary for oci-tar-builder
3 participants