-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 52
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
Updates: #217
Updates: #217
Conversation
- Use latest v1.0.0 linuxkit images. - Add images dir with runc and containerd to be able to better control the version. - Use latest upstream init as it has cgroups v2 as the default. - Add dhcp to the linuxkit services so that interfaces stay configured after lease times expire. - Update to latest Docker in Docker version and update linuxkit spec to handle cgroups v2. - Increase the kernel command line parameter size to 4096 bytes to allow for longer things to be passed like certs, etc. - Default to linuxkit 1.2.0 binary as the containerd issues are resolved with the ccgroup v2 changes. Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
ee57d30
to
f7e7bf1
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Also, always output the matrix. Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
This is because the previous step created the local container image that is needed. Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
What was the motivation for finer version control over runc and containerd? |
Upstream moves a bit slow for me 😬 , in terms of getting to the latest versions. These additions were helpful in my troubleshooting but im not against removing them entirely if you have some concerns. There's enough trade-offs both ways for me to be fine with either approach. |
Presumably you mean upstream linuxkit, not upstream containerd? I.e. you're not trying to get some edge patch from containerd? Assuming its linuxkit, I'm good with building given we're using official release tags/commits. |
Yeah, upstream linuxkit. |
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Previous builds used _ instead of - This goes back to _ so as to not break backwards compatibility. Also fix checksum.txt to not have the out/ directory in it. Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Weinstock <[email protected]>
Description
Why is this needed
Fixes: #
How Has This Been Tested?
How are existing users impacted? What migration steps/scripts do we need?
Checklist:
I have: