-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
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
Revert "Makefile: scripts: Add build args for proxy when using docker… #387
Merged
fidencio
merged 4 commits into
confidential-containers:main
from
fidencio:topic/use-redsocks-in-the-TDX-ci
Jun 21, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3f8441f
Revert "Makefile: scripts: Add build args for proxy when using docker…
fidencio 915d8d8
ci: Handle docker installation for Ubuntu 24.04
fidencio 114c410
ci: Prefer distro packaged containerd for Ubuntu >20.04
fidencio c52d54b
ci: Install python3 packages from the distro
fidencio File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
My concern here is that due to a breaking change in requests 2.32, we had to have a version less than that (but great than 2.28 IIRC?
What version is
python3-requests
installing on the 3 different versions of Ubuntu we are supporting and are we at risk of falling into incompatibility again if there are distro updates, or do we think it is safe to rely on canonical to ensure that doesn't happen?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.
This is a very good question and I'd like to challenge that it doesn't work with something that's not greater than 2.28.
Let's take a look of what we have in our CIs:
When using PIP, the first thing that I've faced was:
So, being totally honest, I'd rather deal with the decision later on on whether using pip and facing the risk to break the system packages, or dealing with an update that may break ubuntu (and then, it seems TDX would be the first one receiving such update and it'd fall on me / Intel to solve it).
Let me know if you're comfortable enough with this, Steve.
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.
Ok, it might be that pre-2.28 doesn't work the latest python-docker and the distros have old docker package that works, so if the tests pass I'm okay to carry this for now.
For reference - this was the error that Choi was seeing with it: