[TEXT_REPORTER] Get Artifacts on GitHub Actions - confusing

[llaville]

Even if it's good explains on Text Reporter section of documentation, with screenshots, there is a situation where it's still confusing.

When you said "Get Artifacts on GitHub Actions", could you confirm that it's only on Pull Request condition ?

Because when I try to found artifacts on standard GA run push, I found nothing !

[nvuillam]

That's quite strange ^^

[llaville]

Is it normal (for you) to make REPORT_OUTPUT_FOLDER (report/) folder with root account ?

i.e:

drwxr-xr-x  5 root     root      4096 Sep  9 10:49 report/

[nvuillam]

@llaville you need to add upload artifacts step in your GHA definition :)

      # Upload Mega-Linter artifacts
      - name: Archive production artifacts
        if: ${{ success() }} || ${{ failure() }}
        uses: actions/upload-artifact@v2
        with:
          name: Mega-Linter reports
          path: |
            report
            mega-linter.log

[nvuillam]

Is it normal (for you) to make REPORT_OUTPUT_FOLDER (report/) folder with root account ?

I don't understand the question :/

[llaville]

I don't understand the question :/

When I run docker image locally, and when report/ directory does not exists yet, Mega-Linter create a report directory with root account ! Is it supposed to be the default behavior ?

BTW, thanks for the upload GA, but I think you should modify the current documentation and specify it (requires for push action and PR is done automatically)

[llaville]

I've just make another test.
Remove report folder created with root account, and create a new one with current user account (llaville) in following screenshot.
And artifact content, after Mega-Linter's run still use root account !

[nvuillam]

Mega-Linter docker image did not work when the user is not root , so yes root user is used

What's the problem with that ? ^^

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity.
It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

If you think this issue should stay open, please remove the O: stale 🤖 label or comment on the issue.

[llaville]

@nvuillam Sorry to reply so lately.
As a result, files in the report/ folder are owned by the root after the run (that means we must have admin access to local machine to remove report folder). To avoid this, you can run the container as a regular user:

docker run -u $(id -u):$(id -g) ...

But it does not work with all linters (especially those installed with npm like editorconfig-checker : see https://docs.npmjs.com/resolving-eacces-permissions-errors-when-installing-packages-globally)

EACCES (-13) error

Perharps we should open a new subject about it (rootless mode), in a new issue ?!
/cc @Kurt-von-Laven

[Kurt-von-Laven]

Please refer to the rootless-docker action for guidance on how to handle this in CI and an explanation of the problems associated with rootful Docker. I run that action before running Mega-Linter or anything else that uses Docker. In CI, Mega-Linter could check whether Docker is running in rootless mode and call that action if needed. Locally, users can install Docker in rootless mode if desired and supported on their platform, but we should add this to our docs. We should link to those npm docs as well, because that is a common pitfall for all users of npm. I opened a new issue (linked above) for this discussion. @llaville, should the current issue be closed at this point, or is there still some problem specific to GitHub artifacts that needs addressing?

[llaville]

Please refer to the rootless-docker action for guidance on how to handle this in CI and an explanation of the problems associated with rootful Docker. I run that action before running Mega-Linter or anything else that uses Docker. In CI, Mega-Linter could check whether Docker is running in rootless mode and call that action if needed. Locally, users can install Docker in rootless mode if desired and supported on their platform, but we should add this to our docs. We should link to those npm docs as well, because that is a common pitfall for all users of npm. I opened a new issue (linked above) for this discussion.

❤️

@llaville, should the current issue be closed at this point, or is there still some problem specific to GitHub artifacts that needs addressing?

No It's all fine for me, and I'll close this issue