Conversation
| OUT_DIR?=_output | ||
| TEMP_DIR:=$(shell mktemp -d -t hyperkubeXXXXXX) | ||
| CNI_RELEASE=0799f5732f2a11b329d9e3d51b9c8f2e3759f2ff | ||
| CNI_RELEASE=v0.6.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why this change? CNI and Kubernetes versions have a matrix of compatibility, especially for old versions like 1.7.x.
Or is this a known good revision to use with 1.7.x?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is a known version we have been using with 1.7
| endif | ||
| cp -r ./* ${TEMP_DIR} | ||
| mkdir -p ${TEMP_DIR}/cni-bin | ||
| mkdir -p ${TEMP_DIR}/cni-bin/bin |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess a result of a change that happened with CNI packaging due to the bump?
| endif | ||
| # Download CNI | ||
| curl -sSL --retry 5 https://storage.googleapis.com/kubernetes-release/network-plugins/cni-${ARCH}-${CNI_RELEASE}.tar.gz | tar -xz -C ${TEMP_DIR}/cni-bin | ||
| curl -sSL --retry 5 https://github.com/containernetworking/cni/releases/download/${CNI_RELEASE}/cni-${ARCH}-${CNI_RELEASE}.tgz | tar -xz -C ${TEMP_DIR}/cni-bin/bin |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And another packaging change from the version bump? What did they do? there's a main "Cni" binary now and the plugins are distributed separately?
|
(Just realized those changes are probably the same changes we've been carrying on 1.7.x for forever. If that's the case, so be it, I don't need the details, just wanted to make sure.) |
|
Yeah, we've been carrying these changes for a long time. |
5 participants
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: