Skip to content

COS-3312: manifest-c9s: switch to building via container tools#167

Merged
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 4 commits intocoreos:mainfrom
dustymabe:dusty-c9s-build-via-container-tools
Jan 30, 2026
Merged

COS-3312: manifest-c9s: switch to building via container tools#167
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 4 commits intocoreos:mainfrom
dustymabe:dusty-c9s-build-via-container-tools

Conversation

@dustymabe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Here are a few prep commits and a final commit for building c9s via container tools (i.e. podman build).

We are starting with c9s because there are no consumers of c9s right now (OKD uses c10s).

remove-from-packages doesn't work in the now build via
container tools workflow so we'd need to convert any of these
into a postprocess.

I checked and there are no files in /usr/share/backgrounds
at all any longer so let's just drop this entry in our manifests
rather than convert it to a postprocess.
Support for RHCOS versioning was added in [1] so we cand drop
this fork from our RHCOS repo now.

[1] coreos/fedora-coreos-config@43b8d41
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 30, 2026

@dustymabe: This pull request references COS-3312 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Here are a few prep commits and a final commit for building c9s via container tools (i.e. podman build).

We are starting with c9s because there are no consumers of c9s right now (OKD uses c10s).

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request switches the c9s variant to be built using container tools, which is a significant and positive step. The changes involve moving configuration from YAML manifests to .conf files and adopting an upstream versioning script. The overall direction is good, but I've found a couple of issues that need attention. A change in common.yaml could unintentionally affect other build variants, and there appears to be a misconfiguration in the builder image for RHEL 10.1. My review includes suggestions to address these points.

I am having trouble creating individual review comments. Click here to see my feedback.

build-args-rhel-10.1.conf (10)

high

The BUILDER_IMG is set to use a path containing rhel9 for a rhel10.1 build. This is inconsistent with other variants (e.g., c10s uses a stream10 builder) and could lead to using an incorrect build environment. If this is not intentional, it should be corrected to use a rhel10 based builder image to ensure build consistency and correctness.

BUILDER_IMG=registry.stage.redhat.io/rhel10/rhel-bootc:10.1

common.yaml (363-365)

high

The remove-from-packages configuration is being removed from common.yaml. Since this file is included by all variants, this change will affect not just c9s, but also c10s, rhel-9.8, and rhel-10.1, which are not being switched to container builds in this PR. This will cause them to include /usr/share/backgrounds, which is likely unintended.

This configuration should be preserved for variants that are not built using containers. A good approach would be to make its inclusion conditional. For example, you could introduce a new variable like build_via_container in the manifests to control this behavior, ensuring that only c9s omits this configuration while other variants remain unaffected.

Comment thread versionary
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@aaradhak aaradhak Jan 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor:
May be we need to add a new line here

Also there is a typo in the commit message

use versionary from fedora-coreos-config repo
Support for RHCOS versioning was added in [1] so we _**cand**_ drop
this fork from our RHCOS repo now.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is just how github shows that the file is now a symbolic link:

$ ls -l ./versionary 
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 dustymabe dustymabe 31 Jan 30 16:36 ./versionary -> fedora-coreos-config/versionary

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah right, the symbolic linked files tend to have this .

Comment thread build-args-rhel-10.1.conf Outdated
Comment thread build-args-rhel-9.8.conf
DESCRIPTION=RHEL CoreOS 9.8
VERSION=9.8
MUTATE_OS_RELEASE=9.8
BUILDER_IMG=registry.stage.redhat.io/rhel9/rhel-bootc:9.8
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@aaradhak aaradhak Jan 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is also another registry.stage here, may be this needs to be changed too?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

rhel 9.8 isn't released yet so we have to use the staging registry for that one

In this workflow more information is coming from the build-args.
These changes take advantage of two upstream changes:

- coreos/fedora-coreos-config@5c20a9e
- coreos/fedora-coreos-config@e38ae10
This is part of https://issues.redhat.com/browse/COS-3312 and
will switch the build of c9s over to the new way of building
our base container images.
@dustymabe dustymabe force-pushed the dusty-c9s-build-via-container-tools branch from 73d2f2e to edf4c1a Compare January 30, 2026 22:04
@dustymabe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

/override ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

See #163

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 30, 2026

@dustymabe: Overrode contexts on behalf of dustymabe: ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

See #163

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-sigs/prow repository.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@aaradhak aaradhak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just the minor typo in the second commit message, other than that everything LGTM

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 30, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aaradhak, dustymabe

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@dustymabe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

/override ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

See #163

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 30, 2026

@dustymabe: Overrode contexts on behalf of dustymabe: ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/scos-10-build-test-qemu

See #163

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-sigs/prow repository.

@dustymabe dustymabe added the lgtm label Jan 30, 2026
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 2815d9c into coreos:main Jan 30, 2026
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants