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

image*.yaml: Enable injection of OCP machine-os metadata by default #1048

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 21, 2022

Conversation

cgwalters
Copy link
Member

@cgwalters cgwalters commented Nov 1, 2022

NOTE: This will actually break things unless we also in the same transaction implement the machine-os-content ➡️ rhel-coreos-8 alias when building the release image.

Which actually implies that this configuration should be part of this repository, and not part of the pipeline config (legacy: jobspec, new: pipeline config.yaml).

Hmm. Perhaps I can for now change the legacy pipeline to grep image.yaml itself...
edit done in https://url.corp.redhat.com/a107a47


image: Drop unused oci-format

It's the default now.


image*.yaml: Enable injection of OCP machine-os metadata by default

This is implemented by coreos/coreos-assembler#3153

We had these in the legacy oscontainer for RHCOS, and OKD today hacks them in via a Dockerfile:
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/blob/0e9fbabbd3363bfc46d9d657bc173666e83e5d18/Dockerfile#L34

We need to carry support for this forward into the new format image, as it's what is used to display the OS version as part of the release image.

Also xref https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TRT-647


It's the default now.
This is implemented by coreos/coreos-assembler#3153

We had these in the legacy oscontainer for RHCOS, and OKD today hacks them in via a Dockerfile:
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/blob/0e9fbabbd3363bfc46d9d657bc173666e83e5d18/Dockerfile#L34

We need to carry support for this forward into the new format image, as it's what is used to display the OS version as part of the release image.

Also xref https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TRT-647
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 1, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 1, 2022

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 1, 2022
@cgwalters
Copy link
Member Author

Pairs with https://url.corp.redhat.com/a107a47

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Nov 3, 2022

/lgtm

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Nov 3, 2022

/test all

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 3, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 3, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cgwalters, jlebon

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@cgwalters cgwalters marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2022 13:42
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 3, 2022
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 8773180 and 2 for PR HEAD f4646dc in total

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 21, 2022

@cgwalters: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 14df397 into openshift:master Nov 21, 2022
jlebon added a commit to jlebon/os that referenced this pull request Sep 27, 2023
This was previously enabled (openshift#1048) and then disabled again (openshift#1084)
because `oc` doesn't know how to handle multiple images with those
labels in the release payload. We'll need to solve this eventually if
we want to be able to ship multiple OS images in the payload (that's
tracked in openshift#1047), but we don't need to block on this if we can remove
the legacy `machine-os-content` at the same time.

See also: openshift/driver-toolkit#101
See also: openshift/machine-config-operator#3364
jlebon added a commit to jlebon/os that referenced this pull request Sep 27, 2023
This was previously enabled (openshift#1048) and then disabled again (openshift#1084)
because `oc` doesn't know how to handle multiple images with those
labels in the release payload. We'll need to solve this eventually if
we want to be able to ship multiple OS images in the payload (that's
tracked in openshift#1047), but we don't need to block on this if we can remove
the legacy `machine-os-content` at the same time.

See also: openshift/driver-toolkit#101
See also: openshift/machine-config-operator#3364
jlebon added a commit to jlebon/os that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2024
This was previously enabled (openshift#1048, openshift#1374) and then disabled again (openshift#1084, openshift#1393).

The last time we tried it, the issue was that there were some references
remaining in openshift/kubernetes and openshift/release. Those have been
cleaned up now:

openshift/release#49156
openshift/kubernetes#1805

So... third time's the charm!
jlebon added a commit to jlebon/os that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2024
This was previously enabled (openshift#1048, openshift#1374) and then disabled again (openshift#1084, openshift#1393).

The last time we tried it, the issue was that there were some references
remaining in openshift/kubernetes and openshift/release. Those have been
cleaned up now:

openshift/release#49156
openshift/kubernetes#1805

So... third time's the charm!
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants