Bug 1890074: daemon: allow an extension to install group of packages #2170
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
sinnykumari
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
bugzilla/severity-high
|
@sinnykumari: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1890074, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
bugzilla/valid-bug
In the previous implementation, an extension was one to one mapping with the package it would install on the host. This can become confusing if enabling an extension would require installing multiple sets of packages which are not install time dependency. Also added e2e test for kernel-devel extensions
|
awesome Sinny! does this just work as rhcos base does have kernel-headers then? if it does I think this is good to get in (I think we spoke about a test for this somewhere but I'm probably just missing the PR rn) |
machine-os-content already ships kernel-headers package along with (kernel-{devel,core,modules}) in extensions/ directory. So, we can just install it by MCO by explicitly specifying that as args to kernel-devel extension test is covered in this PR https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/2170/files#diff-6324e53eb8b87fa591d0dd87722e4dff1200a2bc57d7c83f042a90f4be53f68bR255 😄 |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: cgwalters, runcom, sinnykumari The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return extArgs | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Returns list of extensions possible to install on a CoreOS based system. | ||
| func getSupportedExtensions() map[string][]string { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
love that you add helpful notes ❤️
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
2 similar comments
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/skip |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@sinnykumari: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@sinnykumari: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1890074 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/cherrypick 4.6 |
|
@sinnykumari: cannot checkout 4.6: error checking out 4.6: exit status 1. output: error: pathspec '4.6' did not match any file(s) known to git In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.6 |
|
@sinnykumari: new pull request created: #2173 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
| @@ -865,22 +865,43 @@ func generateExtensionsArgs(oldConfig, newConfig *mcfgv1.MachineConfig) []string | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Supported extensions has package list info that is required | |||
| // to enable an extension | |||
| extensions := getSupportedExtensions() | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you link me to that code? Wait...I think I found it:
https://github.com/openshift/release/blob/959c2954344438c4eed3ec7f52a5e099e8335516/ci-operator/jobs/openshift/release/openshift-release-release-4.7-periodics.yaml#L586
That's...terrifying 😄
I guess it's hard to do much here other than continue to entirely remove validation on OKD short term.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, previously MCC verified that extensions list is valid (on FCOS it skipped this check). Guess its time to rework it so that MCD could mutate it (and leave as is on OKD).
This huge list of RPMs is "additional requirements needed for https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/pull/1/files?file-filters%5B%5D=.yaml#diff-31707c7d28c43a865b772edd586d49ef987cbe508755dbe27b2d9f382f1bdee0"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
damm, missed this usecase. It will be good to have okd-gcp-op test running so that we don't break it.
Will give some thought to fix it.
In the previous implementation, an extension was one to one
mapping with the package it would install on the host. This can
become confusing if enabling an extension would require
installing multiple sets of packages which are not install
time dependency.
Also added e2e test for kernel-devel extensions