-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
Don't hardcode usr/share/rpm #764
Conversation
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
Ah right fun fun, we still set |
e22d3bb
to
b246b66
Compare
OK right so the problem here was actually that rpm-ostree only writes the macro for the rpmdb in postprocessing. |
We don't need this on modern Fedora anymore for example. If we detect the sysimage path, then just use it. Signed-off-by: Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
b246b66
to
5f243f0
Compare
OK this one is actually tested more |
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
This change recently made it into 0.2.26, and I believe it's causing an issue in bootc composes on Fedora 41 due to an interaction with rpm-ostree in some way. When composing an image with
My build is quite a bit larger than necessary as a reproducer, so I'd say that using the Fedora bootc image base would be simplest: Just modify Personally, I'm working around this right now with this commit: |
Hm interestingly I can reproduce this if I add an explicit
Because doing that seems to create an empty rpm database in To the best of my knowledge the main fedora-bootc base image builds aren't affected by this. |
I just ran this:
So indeed something here is working differently than my build. I don't have any postprocess scripts that would be doing that, but it may be that a post from an RPM is interfering in some way? I don't think I'm able to manipulate |
I would add a
Yes, quite possibly. It would likely take some debugging to figure out which one. Note that invoking
Sure you can. If that directory is an empty rpmdb, you could likely work around this with just an I'll reiterate here that I hope you can drop your fork of the base image and check out what we're doing in https://gitlab.com/fedora/bootc/tracker/-/issues/32 because it's exactly these kind of things that it's designed more to avoid. |
It's not quite small enough for "empty" (which seems to be around 212992 bytes). I can't imagine it's actually useful for anything, though, so I'm just going to remove it and see what happens! Regarding bootc #32, the current recommended approach for rechunking is currently broken until buildah #5975 gets ironed out anyways, and I know there's a lot of work to do and a lack of bandwidth to get something like |
We don't need this on modern Fedora anymore for example. If we detect the sysimage path, then just use it.