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

update SDK to 0.33.0 #3213

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jun 22, 2023
Merged

update SDK to 0.33.0 #3213

merged 7 commits into from
Jun 22, 2023

Conversation

bcressey
Copy link
Contributor

Issue number:
N/A

Description of changes:
Switch to the new SDK, which includes:

  • Rust 1.70.0
  • Go 1.20.5
  • xfsprogs
  • re-homed RPM macros

The macro move requires some minor fixes. The most visible change will be that RPMs now have the architecture set correctly to the target's architecture, rather than including that in the package name. RPMs aren't directly user-facing except in the case of application-inventory.json, which is now simpler to generate.

I've also cleaned up packages that were (incorrectly) tagged as "noarch". This changes application-inventory.json for the affected packages, which move from "Architecture": "noarch" to the target's architecture.

Testing done:
Built some variants:

  • aws-k8s-1.24 on x86_64 host for x86_64 target
  • aws-k8s-1.24 on aarch64 host for aarch64 target
  • aws-k8s-1.27 on x86_64 host for aarch64 target
  • aws-k8s-1.27 on aarch64 host for x86_64 target

I checked application-inventory.json on the running instances and confirmed that the prefix was correctly matched and removed, and that the "Architecture" field was set to the target's architecture for all packages.

Terms of contribution:

By submitting this pull request, I agree that this contribution is dual-licensed under the terms of both the Apache License, version 2.0, and the MIT license.

@stmcginnis
Copy link
Contributor

Please revert ee7205d in this PR.

We had to pin the node's rust version temporarily, otherwise the cargo index format was getting a mismatch between the 1.69 format and the newer 1.70 sparse format. Once we move to 1.70 in the SDK, we can remove that pin so the host gets the latest version, which will be 1.70 or later that supports the right format.

Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
This causes the RPM package architecture to match the target's rather
than the host's. By default, `dnf` and `rpm` will ignore non-native
RPMs, but both can be forced to use them.

When the package architecture is set correctly, it's not necessary to
include the architecture in the package name, and the macros in the
SDK no longer do so. Fix up various places in the image build process
that assumed the architecture would be present.

Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
This was used as a quick way to disable debuginfo generation, but it
creates ambiguity when using the RPM's architecture to indicate what
target the package was built for.

These packages capture the architecture in the sysroot-based paths
used for installed files, so they are not actually arch-agnostic in
the sense that "noarch" implies.

Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <bcressey@amazon.com>
This reverts commit ee7205d.

Pinning the Rust version is no longer required, now that Rust 1.70 is
in the SDK and supports the new sparse index format by default.
@bcressey bcressey force-pushed the sdk-bump branch 3 times, most recently from 8e4aed7 to 7633bc0 Compare June 22, 2023 21:02
@bcressey bcressey marked this pull request as ready for review June 22, 2023 22:26
Copy link
Contributor

@stmcginnis stmcginnis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me.

@bcressey bcressey merged commit 776fd30 into bottlerocket-os:develop Jun 22, 2023
38 checks passed
@bcressey bcressey deleted the sdk-bump branch June 22, 2023 22:56
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.

None yet

3 participants