Remove binaries from the project #116
Labels
kind/feature
Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
size/S
estimate of the amount of work to address the issue
Comments
displague
added
size/S
|
This would help a lot. A few other changes I’d like to contribute here on this code base but that part made this component one I drag my feet wanting to even touch |
|
Yep I think this will definitely help working with this code, my main hangup is that then this code base then loses its |
mmlb
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 14, 2021
## Description This PR gets rid of the multiple makefiles / recursive makes approach used to build iPXE. Simplifying the iPXE build description quite a bit. ## Why is this needed Updating iPXE build config is quite convoluted and makes contributions harder than necessary. As @geekgonecrazy experienced in #79. This is the first steps to possibly addressing #116. ## How Has This Been Tested? `make` ## How are existing users impacted? What migration steps/scripts do we need? Should be easier to mess with iPXE config/builds.
|
🤜 lfs, #79 (comment). I guess just one more reason for this then :D. |
3 tasks
mmlb
added a commit
to mmlb/tinkerbell-boots
that referenced
this issue
Jan 28, 2021
This makes it easier for contributors to contribute since we don't have to reproduce or over write the ixpe builds they contribute. This does mean the project isn't `go get`able but I guess we'll just have to live with that. Closes tinkerbell#116 Signed-off-by: Manuel Mendez <mmendez@equinix.com>
mmlb
added a commit
to mmlb/tinkerbell-boots
that referenced
this issue
Jan 29, 2021
This makes it easier for contributors to contribute since we don't have to reproduce or over write the ixpe builds they contribute. This does mean the project isn't `go get`able but I guess we'll just have to live with that. Closes tinkerbell#116 Signed-off-by: Manuel Mendez <mmendez@equinix.com>
mmlb
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 29, 2021
## Description Removes the iPXE binaries we can actually build out of GitLFS. ## Why is this needed This makes it easier for contributors to contribute since we don't have to reproduce or over write the ixpe builds they contribute. This does mean the project isn't `go get`able but I guess we'll just have to live with that. Closes #116 ## How Has This Been Tested? N/A
geekgonecrazy
pushed a commit
to geekgonecrazy/boots
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2021
This makes it easier for contributors to contribute since we don't have to reproduce or over write the ixpe builds they contribute. This does mean the project isn't `go get`able but I guess we'll just have to live with that. Closes tinkerbell#116 Signed-off-by: Manuel Mendez <mmendez@equinix.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Expected Behaviour
Project binaries should be external artifacts, built through automation, not included in the git repository.
Current Behaviour
Binaries are included in the project and are expected to be compiled and updated by contributors. The binaries must then be manually verified through recompiling (with the same tools) and checksum verification. This slows our ability to accept new changes (#79).
Possible Solution
Similar to #4, the ipxe/bin artifacts should be published to GitHub if they are needed outside of a boots container. If a boots container image is sufficient, the binaries should be compiled at image build time, not trusted from the repository.
The LFS ipxe/bin artifacts should then be removed and the instructions (https://github.com/tinkerbell/boots#local-setup) updated accordingly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: