RHDEVDOCS-3418 Create known issue for 2011293 #37846
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
size/S
|
✔️ Deploy Preview for osdocs ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: a80df92 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/osdocs/deploys/6171672b215a03000741cc10 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-37846--osdocs.netlify.app |
gabemontero
left a comment
gabemontero
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Text looks good to me @rolfedh
I've added suggestion wrt the spots where you need to fill in.
hi level summary:
- mco team owns registries.conf and the cluster image config
- IMO you can just link to that docs page vs. spelling out the workaround here ... but I'll defer if others have strong opinions otherwise
| Workaround: If you have `<tbd>` privileges, update `registries.conf` with the following lines: | ||
| + | ||
| ---- | ||
| tbd |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
before you ask @rolfedh :-) I am not an SME when it comes to updating registries.conf on a cluster (build just consume this)
I see this doc link from the RHCOS / MCO section https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.9/architecture/architecture-rhcos.html reference registries.conf
But I think this link https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.9/openshift_images/image-configuration.html#images-configuration-shortname_image-configuration has the instructions for setting them up.
That doc again mentions the MCO watches that config object. So I would consider them being the SMEs for that.
That said, I think you can just for the work around cite https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.9/openshift_images/image-configuration.html#images-configuration-shortname_image-configuration as the instructions for configuring things so those Red Hat registries are included.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The short name feature is brand new and only applies to cri-o - we shouldn't reference it as a known issue in a prior release.
Builds do not support this because we couldn't guarantee that buildah sent the right credentials to the right container registry. The work-around is "use fully qualified names in image pull specifications."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, @adambkaplan and @gabemontero. I'll update the known issue to reflect your comments. In BZ 2011293, the Version is 4.7. Should it be 4.9?
| Otherwise, if you cannot update `registries.conf`, include the `registry.redhat.io`, `registry.access.redhat.com`, or `quay.io` registry names when you specify an image. For example, in the `<filename>` file specify an image like this: | ||
| + | ||
| ---- | ||
| <example of fully qualified image name> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
registry.redhat.io/ubi8/ubi:latest and registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7.7:latest are examples of fully qualfied image refs.
If you do the configuration ^ to add those registries to registries.conf, then you can have builds with Dockerfile's that have
FROM rhel7.7:latest
or
FROM ubi8/ubi:latest
|
See #37893 instead. |
3 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.