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

Dockerfile: fix vendor validation #253

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 30, 2023
Merged

Conversation

crazy-max
Copy link
Member

follow-up #252 (comment)

Signed-off-by: CrazyMax crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com

Signed-off-by: CrazyMax <crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com>
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 22, 2023

Codecov Report

Base: 55.55% // Head: 55.55% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (5674cae) compared to base (ac5992b).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

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.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@@ -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
Copy link
Member

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?

Copy link
Member

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?

Copy link
Member Author

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

Copy link
Member

@thaJeztah thaJeztah left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@thaJeztah thaJeztah merged commit 20454ad into docker:master Jan 30, 2023
@crazy-max crazy-max deleted the fix-dockerfile branch January 30, 2023 11:18
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.

3 participants