Conversation
|
If the design looks ok I'll update Jenkins to check for the new scripts and run them instead of the old entrypoint. |
Signed-off-by: Daniel Nephin <dnephin@docker.com>
d5e5f72 to
dbf580b
Compare
|
cc @seemethere @andrewhsu I think you use a different entrypoint for the integration suite, but just an FYI. |
|
@dnephin We do use a different endpoint but this could be useful in the future. Would be opposed to changing the names of the architecture specific ones to their Example:
|
|
I'd like them to match what shows up in github, so if we do that I think we need to change the github integration. I think that's a good idea, let's do that after this merges? |
|
build failures were just flaky test, re-running, but this is working |
|
build is green! |
|
Seems sane to me 👍 We probably want to be careful to ensure Jenkins isn't running scripts directly outside a container (just for that extra bit of protection Docker can provide from malicious PRs), but it looks like that's the intended use of these scripts, so 👍. (just mentioning it for completeness) Regarding naming, IMO we should adjust everything to match the OCI platform names (instead of |
|
all green here |
|
@seemethere @andrewhsu ping, you might need to update things on your side as well. |
We've slowly been moving away from
hack/make.shas the in-container entrypoint for everything (#33987, #27964). This PR adds a newhack/cidirectory which acts as the entrypoint for all the CI builds.This setup has the following advantages:
crosson z/powerpc/arm)Dockerfile(which is used for both CI and development) and into these entrypoint scripts, so we can provide better defaults for developmenthack/ci/windows-RS1instead of hundreds of lines in the jenkins config)