Fix ImageOS format

[bryannaegele]

The current algorithm given ubuntu-18.04 returns ubuntu18.04 when it should be ubuntu18 according to actions/runner-images#345 (comment).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #761 (42832bf) into master (0f04942) will increase coverage by 1.34%.
The diff coverage is 57.21%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #761      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   49.27%   50.61%   +1.34%     
==========================================
  Files          23       23              
  Lines        2401     2594     +193     
==========================================
+ Hits         1183     1313     +130     
- Misses       1090     1142      +52     
- Partials      128      139      +11     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/container/docker_run.go	1.84% <0.00%> (-0.09%)	⬇️
pkg/model/workflow.go	25.29% <2.43%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
pkg/common/git.go	52.85% <30.15%> (-6.94%)	⬇️
pkg/runner/runner.go	68.96% <33.33%> (-7.51%)	⬇️
pkg/model/planner.go	34.56% <41.37%> (+1.48%)	⬆️
pkg/container/docker_pull.go	36.17% <64.70%> (+17.98%)	⬆️
pkg/runner/step_context.go	74.76% <75.81%> (+5.81%)	⬆️
pkg/runner/run_context.go	80.36% <98.55%> (+3.95%)	⬆️
pkg/runner/command.go	90.58% <100.00%> (+2.35%)	⬆️
pkg/runner/expression.go	87.91% <100.00%> (+1.27%)	⬆️
... and 5 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4036b8a...42832bf. Read the comment docs.

[mergify]

@bryannaegele this pull request has failed checks 🛠

[bryannaegele]

It seems all PRs are failing on the mac os test at the same spot. There's a warning about attempting to use deprecated short shas.

[catthehacker]

It seems all PRs are failing on the mac os test at the same spot. There's a warning about attempting to use deprecated short shas.

It fails at pulling Docker image. That is unfortunate thing we have to deal with since macOS runners don't have Docker pre-installed and thus GitHub doesn't have special API keys on them that have higher rate limits.

[basic/build] toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit
time="2021-07-26T06:36:22Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
time="2021-07-26T06:36:22Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
time="2021-07-26T06:36:22Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
time="2021-07-26T06:36:22Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
time="2021-07-26T06:36:23Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
[basic/build]   ❌  Failure - ./actions/action1
time="2021-07-26T06:36:23Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"
time="2021-07-26T06:36:23Z" level=debug msg="toomanyrequests: You have reached your pull rate limit. You may increase the limit by authenticating and upgrading: docker.com/increase-rate-limit"

[bryannaegele]

Ah. Gotcha. That's unfortunate.

If I need to add any test coverage, I'd be happy to. I'm a complete amateur at Go and didn't see a good place to add it since the original PR didn't have any coverage for this, so I'm at a bit of a loss on how to go about it though 😆

[catthehacker]

Can be added in #750 otherwise TestGetGitHubContext would need to be rewritten to read full yaml or you would have to deal with yaml.Nodes which is hell

[bryannaegele]

Sounds like adding it to #750 after merge makes the most sense.