Debian: switch to crun and cgroups v2 #22706
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
release-note
approved
|
Ephemeral COPR build failed. @containers/packit-build please check. |
|
Cockpit tests failed for commit 4d0f63c23e8fb70a5ae1817c4f6dff74bb8cc4b6. @martinpitt, @jelly, @mvollmer please check. |
| @@ -9,13 +9,10 @@ import ( | |||
| . "github.com/onsi/gomega" | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| func isDebianRunc(pTest *PodmanTestIntegration) bool { | |||
| // FIXME 2024-05-14: "Debian" here is a proxy for "netavark < 1.10" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we could parse podman info to get the real version
At this point I seriously question if we should continue using the debian sid distro versions.
Netavark v1.5 has been released on Feb 2, 2023, yet SID is still on 1.4 somehow. Not for this PR of course but I really wonder if we have to consider alternatives.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for bringing this up, that's the broader question we need to address next. The entire purpose of testing in Debian was quick discovery of problems that would affect RHEL. This may be a good time to evaluate what testing gaps we have and how we can fill them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we turn on zstd:chunked, composefs, and others for Fedora, we could continue with old checks for Debian.
edsantiago
force-pushed
the
debian-modernize
branch
from
4d0f63c to
ee164a4
Compare
|
Ephemeral COPR build failed. @containers/packit-build please check. |
|
Cockpit tests failed for commit ee164a4d22b04a1261a3dcce31563d49ca4c8a9c. @martinpitt, @jelly, @mvollmer please check. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: edsantiago, Luap99 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
edsantiago
force-pushed
the
debian-modernize
branch
from
ee164a4 to
5e7643c
Compare
As agreed in Planning meeting of 2024-03-20, Podman 5.x will drop support for cgroups v1 and for runc. Make it so. CI images built in containers/automation_images#338 Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <[email protected]>
edsantiago
force-pushed
the
debian-modernize
branch
from
5e7643c to
1ae0547
Compare
|
@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL. This has become a lot uglier than my last push, I really have no idea why. It has also become a little more pressing because the new systemd on debian no longer supports cgroups v1. (At this point we need to reconsider what purpose is served by testing on debian) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, please make sure to file a issue for the new debian/systemd skips so we can investigate them later and get them fixed hopefully.
The one main reason why debian might be needed is appamor, we have no knowledge of apparmor so having it as sanity check that podman at least works is good, i.e. pasta apparmor issues recently but also that the profile in c/common works.
|
/lgtm |
Another new-VM import from containers/automation_images#338 ...because the usual conflict dealio in that repo. This should mostly be a NOP. All the major work was done in containers#22706. Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <[email protected]>
stale-locking-app
bot
added
the
locked - please file new issue/PR
As agreed in Planning meeting of 2024-03-20, Podman 5.x will
drop support for cgroups v1 and for runc. Make it so.
CI images built in containers/automation_images#338
Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago [email protected]