-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 172
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
Dockerfile: fix vendor validation #253
Conversation
Signed-off-by: CrazyMax <crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com>
Codecov ReportBase: 55.55% // Head: 55.55% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #253 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 55.55% 55.55%
=======================================
Files 9 9
Lines 666 666
=======================================
Hits 370 370
Misses 253 253
Partials 43 43 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
@@ -38,7 +38,8 @@ FROM scratch AS vendor-update | |||
COPY --from=vendored /out / | |||
|
|||
FROM vendored AS vendor-validate | |||
RUN --mount=type=bind,target=.,rw <<EOT | |||
RUN --mount=target=/context \ | |||
--mount=target=.,type=tmpfs <<EOT |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wondering if we should change all the .
's with an absolute paths (I think it's /src
in this case?). Currently I have to read "up" in the Dockerfile to understand what .
refers to.
Do we know why a tmpfs
is needed for this? Is this an issue with overlayfs
not supporting some attributes, or what's the cause?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or is there no content at all (as there's no COPY
) and that was the issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or is there no content at all (as there's no
COPY
) and that was the issue?
Yes that was the issue
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
follow-up #252 (comment)
Signed-off-by: CrazyMax crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com