-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
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
Determine CPU architecture with $basearch #350
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #350 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 39.40% 39.40%
=======================================
Files 15 15
Lines 868 868
=======================================
Hits 342 342
Misses 526 526
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
a5cdc0f
to
08e6ee1
Compare
08e6ee1
to
da1c38b
Compare
Results for SNAFU CI Test
|
Signed-off-by: Raul Sevilla <rsevilla@redhat.com>
cd1bb0d
to
11ff2a5
Compare
Results for SNAFU CI Test
|
/rerun all snafu/vegeta_wrapper |
Results for SNAFU CI Test
|
/rerun all snafu/vegeta_wrapper |
Results for SNAFU CI Test
|
I'm not sure if modifying ppc64le images is in our scope, I think they are independent images some other folks are using and maintaining. @jtaleric can you chime in here on this? If we want to add ppc64le support on our end for our wrappers, I'd like it if we make the main Dockerfiles for our wrappers architecture-independent and just do a |
Looks like all the dnf steps are running successfully for arm64, this is a great change! Nice! More on the ppc64le- just remember we specifically ignore building ppc64le images in our CI due to this support discrepancy: https://github.com/cloud-bulldozer/benchmark-wrapper/blob/master/ci/build_matrix.py#L83 |
Yeah, step by step, we can address ppc64le container building in a different PR. Let's try to make atomic changes :) |
Ah I see, yeah that makes sense. I'm just hesitant about modifying some Dockerfiles that another team is using without their input. But on second thought the change is equivalent pretty much. I'm down. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got my LGTM
yeah, let's make the affected people know about changes in ppc64le Dockerfiles once we do them :) |
Signed-off-by: Raul Sevilla rsevilla@redhat.com
Description
Thanks to the yum variable $basearch, we can optimize how we use centos8 repositories, and get rid of ppc64le specific repos.
Fixes
Some arm64 image builds fail in CI because we don't set architecture correctly