devicestate/firstboot: check for missing bases early #7219
Conversation
stolowski
added
the
Needs Samuele review
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #7219 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 80.44% 80.43% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 636 636
Lines 49788 49800 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 40050 40056 +6
- Misses 6631 6635 +4
- Partials 3107 3109 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
overlord/devicestate/firstboot.go
Outdated
| @@ -76,6 +76,24 @@ func installSeedSnap(st *state.State, sn *snap.SeedSnap, flags snapstate.Flags, | |||
| return snapstate.InstallPath(st, &sideInfo, path, "", sn.Channel, flags) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func checkSeedBases(snaps []*snap.Info) error { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it would be good if some of the checks that snap debug validate-seed does would share code with this (or vice versa). See https://github.com/mvo5/snappy/blob/master/image/image.go#L792 and #7105
image/image.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // ensure core is available | ||
| if info.Base == "" && info.SnapType == snap.TypeApp && info.InstanceName() != "snapd" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would split this out into info.EffectiveBase()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
as long as we find at least a couple other places that can use it
| errs := image.CheckBasesAndProviders(allSnapInfos) | ||
| if errs != nil { | ||
| // only report the first error encountered | ||
| return nil, errs[0] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if we should do something similar to https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7219/files#diff-da07f373046a0a24e67b18699dc15a70L845 here, i.e. build an error that contains all the individual issues? Maybe we can make the result from "CheckBaseAndProviders" something like:
type MultiErr struct {
Header string
errs []errors
}
func (e MultiErr) Add(errs []error) { ... }
func (e MultiErr) Error() string {
var buf bytes.Buffer
for _, err := range e.errs {
fmt.Fprintf(&buf, "\n- %s", err)
}
return fmt.Sprintf("%s:%s", e.Header, buf.Bytes())
}but looking at it it (after I typed it out) it seems like this should probably a separate PR and get a 👍 from @pedrons first :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, I was considering this and I'm happy to reconsider. The reason I did it this way is prepare-image validates all aspects of the image and reports all errors at once and this is useful summary for the user when assembling an image. However, when the image is already booted I thought it's fine to report just one error which is in-line with error reporting we normally do in snapd.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, I don't think it's worth the complexity in seeding code itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I misread the issue, I'm fine either way given this will end up in snap/ code.
overlord/devicestate/firstboot.go
Outdated
| @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ import ( | |||
| "github.com/snapcore/snapd/asserts/snapasserts" | |||
| "github.com/snapcore/snapd/dirs" | |||
| "github.com/snapcore/snapd/i18n" | |||
| "github.com/snapcore/snapd/image" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we want to import in this direction though
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Moved CheckBasesAndProviders to snap package (and renamed).
…enamed to ValidateBasesAndProviders.
… into firsboot-early-basecheck
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // ValidateBasesAndProviders checks that all bases/default-providers are part of the seed | ||
| func ValidateBasesAndProviders(snapInfos map[string]*Info) []error { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
now that it's here, this probably needs some unit tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added (+ we have the existing tests in image/validate_seed_test.go).
pedronis
removed
the
Needs Samuele review
pedronis
force-pushed
the
firsboot-early-basecheck
branch
from
442374e
to
7feb293
Compare
Check for missing bases and error out early in firstboot seeding.