-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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
Add boringcrypto image #71
Conversation
97e3ad1
to
45eb9a2
Compare
The CI is failing the same bug that @andyasp encountered here #70 (comment) |
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.
See questions.
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.
Please see comments
thanks for the reviews @aknuds1, I think I addressed all of the issues. Sorry for the state of this PR; I should have reviewed it on my own a few times before opening. |
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.
LGTM, modulo a couple of newline nits.
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <[email protected]>
I pushed a commit to pin the go version so we can see a passing CI. After that I'll undo the pin and merge on failing CI |
07c0eb1
to
5783e38
Compare
I had to make some adjustment to the PR. As of now this is the amd4 binary built from this PR using the commit where CI tests ran - 7a0770d
and includes boringcrypto & FIPS symbols as opposed to standard library symbols
The tests pass on 7a0770d with the go version pinned to 1.20.5. I reverted the pin in f4ef221 that's why the branch is now failing CI. The failing CI is due to a bugfix in docker which hasn't reached us yet (see #70 (comment)) |
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.
Please see questions, otherwise good to go I think?
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.
LGTM
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.
LGTM, although you should remove the gcompat
package in Alpine.
commands ran on the image from 617719f
|
For context, @dimitarvdimitrov and I decided to not statically link the boringcrypto based rollout-operator, since it leads to warnings during the link stage about implicit libc dependencies at runtime (also glibc static linking is discouraged). The dynamically linked image should work perfectly within the Docker image, as it just links to Alpine's musl (libc) library. |
This reverts commit 1c6fa9b.
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.
Minor comments, nice job!
Co-authored-by: Andy Asp <[email protected]>
--------- Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Andy Asp <[email protected]>
* Add boringcrypto image (#71) --------- Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Andy Asp <[email protected]> * Update CHANGELOG.md * Pin go version in CI --------- Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Andy Asp <[email protected]>
This adds a boringcrypto image
make publish-images
grafana/rollout-operator-boringcrypto