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

[WIP] feat: split archive functionality #2

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

jpower432
Copy link
Contributor

@jpower432 jpower432 commented Jul 24, 2021

Features added:

  • Bundles are archived and split per user defined size
  • Initial functionality for validating bundle checksum and contents
  • Bundle full extraction included
  • Tests included (67% code coverage)

@jpower432 jpower432 changed the title [WIP] feat: split archive functionality feat: split archive functionality Jul 26, 2021
@jpower432 jpower432 requested a review from afflom July 26, 2021 18:32
@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
package archive
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With regard to portability, I think that this might best added as a subpackage to bundle. Thoughts?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jpower432 jpower432 Jul 26, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@afflom I considered it a functional component outside of the bundle that interacts with bundles, but I would be willing to move it under bundle as a sub package.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I vote making it a sub-package. I asked Eric for his opinion.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since we don't yet know how these packages/command will look when integrating with oc, this is fine for now. Once we know those requirements, we can reorganize packages if needed.

@jpower432
Copy link
Contributor Author

@afflom, as discussed, a couple notes/request for change:

  • Allow the user to specify an output directory
  • Rely on gzip to validate the tar integrity with CRC
  • Ensure that bundles cannot be written to themselves

@jpower432 jpower432 marked this pull request as draft July 27, 2021 21:08
@jpower432 jpower432 changed the title feat: split archive functionality [WIP] feat: split archive functionality Jul 29, 2021
@jpower432
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this. OBE per pull request #28

@jpower432 jpower432 closed this Aug 9, 2021
@jpower432 jpower432 deleted the feat/bundle-archiving branch September 1, 2021 16:11
dorzel pushed a commit to dorzel/oc-mirror that referenced this pull request May 24, 2023
- Update the .goreleaser.yaml to include s390x
- Update the cross build for s390x
- Link gcc to s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary

On s390x go compiler seems to expect the gcc binary at
s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary. However on rhel it is not installed there.

Signed-off-by: Jan Schintag <jan.schintag@de.ibm.com>
openshift-merge-robot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2023
…sing dockerfile and add ppc64le build to Makefile (#624)

* MULTIARCH-3440: refine multiarch support for test-unit and test-e2e using dockerfile and add ppc64le build to Makefile

- Update the .goreleaser.yaml to include ppc64le
- Update the Dockerfile to include wget and pigz dependency
- Update the Dockerfile to consider arch it's built on
- Update the util.sh to be arch agnostic
- Update the cross build for ppc64le

Signed-off-by: Paul Bastide <pbastide@redhat.com>

* MULTIARCH-3440: Update per review

Signed-off-by: Paul Bastide <pbastide@us.ibm.com>

Co-authored-by: Jan Schintag <43986265+jschintag@users.noreply.github.com>

* MULTIARCH-3441: Enable builds for s390x (#1)

- Update the .goreleaser.yaml to include s390x
- Update the cross build for s390x
- Link gcc to s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary

On s390x go compiler seems to expect the gcc binary at
s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary. However on rhel it is not installed there.

Signed-off-by: Jan Schintag <jan.schintag@de.ibm.com>

* MULTIARCH-3441: Enable builds for s390x (#1) (#2)

- Update the .goreleaser.yaml to include s390x
- Update the cross build for s390x
- Link gcc to s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary

On s390x go compiler seems to expect the gcc binary at
s390x-linux-gnu-gcc binary. However on rhel it is not installed there.

Signed-off-by: Jan Schintag <jan.schintag@de.ibm.com>

* MULTIARCH-3440: update the code to use go-containerregistry for all arches and add arm64

Signed-off-by: Paul Bastide <pbastide@redhat.com>

* MULTIARCH-3440: Adding cross-build for arm64

Signed-off-by: Paul Bastide <pbastide@redhat.com>

---------

Signed-off-by: Paul Bastide <pbastide@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Schintag <jan.schintag@de.ibm.com>
Co-authored-by: Jan Schintag <43986265+jschintag@users.noreply.github.com>
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.

None yet

3 participants