Skip to content
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

Docker-build fails to detect podman #41100

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 12, 2024

Conversation

edeandrea
Copy link
Contributor

Although I can't reproduce #41085 I found some things which may cause it. See the conversation history in #41085.

Fixes #41085

@edeandrea edeandrea force-pushed the docker-build-fails-detect-podman branch 2 times, most recently from 8e20b6e to b6a794f Compare June 10, 2024 17:32
@quarkus-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@edeandrea edeandrea force-pushed the docker-build-fails-detect-podman branch from 749529a to f909acb Compare June 10, 2024 17:40
@edeandrea
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI this is an addition to #40729, so it'll have to land wherever that lands.

@quarkus-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@cescoffier cescoffier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Following the reported issue, I would add a warning when the docker extension is used and fallback on podman. Thus we inform the user that using the specific podman extension is better.

Now there are teams where some members use docker and some podman. In this case what happens if we use both extensions?

@edeandrea
Copy link
Contributor Author

Now there are teams where some members use docker and some podman. In this case what happens if we use both extensions?

If they don't care about doing anything podman-specific (like building multi-arch images) then they can continue doing what they are doing today.

If they want to do things which deviate from common functionality (like building multi-arch images) then they would need both extensions & to configure both extensions, and then use quarkus.container-image.builder=docker|podman to set which one wins.

@edeandrea edeandrea force-pushed the docker-build-fails-detect-podman branch 2 times, most recently from 9f043b1 to 49357b6 Compare June 11, 2024 12:04
@edeandrea
Copy link
Contributor Author

Following the reported issue, I would add a warning when the docker extension is used and fallback on podman. Thus we inform the user that using the specific podman extension is better

@cescoffier this is done. I've rebased my commits into a single commit.

@gsmet
Copy link
Member

gsmet commented Jun 11, 2024

Not sure what's going on but CI looks stuck on this one. I'll see what I can do.

@gsmet gsmet force-pushed the docker-build-fails-detect-podman branch from 49357b6 to b90b893 Compare June 11, 2024 14:24
@gsmet gsmet added the triage/waiting-for-ci Ready to merge when CI successfully finishes label Jun 11, 2024
@quarkus-bot
Copy link

quarkus-bot bot commented Jun 11, 2024

Status for workflow Quarkus CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus CI on commit b90b893.

Failing Jobs

Status Name Step Failures Logs Raw logs Build scan

Flaky tests - Develocity

⚙️ JVM Tests - JDK 17

📦 extensions/smallrye-reactive-messaging-kafka/deployment

io.quarkus.smallrye.reactivemessaging.kafka.deployment.dev.KafkaDevServicesDevModeTestCase.sseStream - History

  • Assertion condition defined as a Lambda expression in io.quarkus.smallrye.reactivemessaging.kafka.deployment.dev.KafkaDevServicesDevModeTestCase Expecting size of: [] to be greater than or equal to 2 but was 0 within 10 seconds. - org.awaitility.core.ConditionTimeoutException
org.awaitility.core.ConditionTimeoutException: 
Assertion condition defined as a Lambda expression in io.quarkus.smallrye.reactivemessaging.kafka.deployment.dev.KafkaDevServicesDevModeTestCase 
Expecting size of:
  []
to be greater than or equal to 2 but was 0 within 10 seconds.
	at org.awaitility.core.ConditionAwaiter.await(ConditionAwaiter.java:167)
	at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:119)
	at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:31)

@gsmet gsmet merged commit 5270018 into quarkusio:main Jun 12, 2024
50 of 51 checks passed
@quarkus-bot quarkus-bot bot removed the triage/waiting-for-ci Ready to merge when CI successfully finishes label Jun 12, 2024
@quarkus-bot quarkus-bot bot added this to the 3.12 - main milestone Jun 12, 2024
Comment on lines -45 to +46
public static ContainerRuntime detectContainerRuntime() {
return detectContainerRuntime(true);
}

public static ContainerRuntime detectContainerRuntime(List<ContainerRuntime> orderToCheckRuntimes) {
public static ContainerRuntime detectContainerRuntime(ContainerRuntime... orderToCheckRuntimes) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Due to this change, all callers of detectContainerRuntime() will fail with NoSuchMethodException unless they are recompiled. Let me send a PR to get the method back.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yikes! Totally my bad @ppalaga . I can take care of it if you'd like

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Docker-build fails to detect podman
4 participants