Testing here: https://jenkins.ceph.com/job/ceph-dev-pipeline/1496/console

jenkins test docs

Aaaand force-pushed again to pull in #66059 to fix the docs build.

stupid question, but do we need this abstraction for the base image? maybe we just choose to target rocky 10 as the container base for the U release and drop anything about centos 9?

This parameterization enables us to test different base OSes at will. Now when el11 comes out, we can just say "use it" without having to hardcode more if statements.

thanks @djgalloway. i guess my point is that each ceph release only tests/ships one container image, and we'll probably only change that container base distro every ~2 major releases. we might leverage that fact by always targeting a single base image to avoid accumulating baggage like if [ "$MAJOR" -le 9 ] and special cases for centos vs rocky vs alma

I thought tentacle is expected to work on CentOS 9 and Rocky 10. We would have caught the python3.12 thing much sooner if it was possible to ask for main built on Rocky 10 without a hardcoded Containerfile.

I thought tentacle is expected to work on CentOS 9 and Rocky 10. We would have caught the python3.12 thing much sooner if it was possible to ask for main built on Rocky 10 without a hardcoded Containerfile.

tentacle should support package installations on centos 9 and rocky 10. but we've never changed the container base in a point release, so i'd assume that tentacle containers will remain based on centos 9

not switching to el10 container base: I'm not sure of that. We wanted to switch when we cut tentacle, but things just weren't ready then.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/73883.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/73884.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/73885.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/73888.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/73889.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/74161.

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity for 60 days. It will be closed if no further activity occurs for another 30 days.
If you are a maintainer or core committer, please follow-up on this pull request to identify what steps should be taken by the author to move this proposed change forward.
If you are the author of this pull request, thank you for your proposed contribution. If you believe this change is still appropriate, please ensure that any feedback has been addressed and ask for a code review.

This PR is under test in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/74811.