iasql
iasql copied to clipboard
Add CI tests to make sure IaSQL container with different architecture/OS
- there's no gh actions predefined os with arm arch
- for windows and macos it needs to exist an additional step to install docker accordingly in each os
reference can be useful - https://github.com/alantech/alan/blob/main/.github/workflows/release.yml
I've been working on this today but I think I'm aborting... I thought I was so close, including the ARM64 test but did not work...
Windows context:
Note: Take into account that these are only issues BUILDING the image, there's no problem for windows users to pull from dockerhub and run it as David test it a couple of days ago.
- Windows Github Actions runner does have
docker
installed but it was not able to build the image because thedocker daemon
needs a configuration change to run Linux containers and we cannot change that for the runner. - David did some testing on his Windows machine with the right docker config and realized if someone wants to build on Windows would need to clone the repo with Unix-style line ending.
- Another option to build it in the Github Actions runner it would be to create a windows oriented Dockerfile, but does not seem worthy at all at this stage.
- Another option is to create our own self-hosted runner with windows and docker configure properly. I'm not so convinced we need to spend time on this now either.
MacOS:
- MacOS runners in GHA do not have docker pre-installed due to license issues...
- I've found the colima project that was really promising. It basically lets you run docker without all the DockerDesktop issues. It also lets you configure an ARM64 VM. The problem is that the builds after a long period of time failed. The main problem I detected is a network issue... Not sure if it is a network issue on the Colima VM or the macOS runner itself...
- There's an option of trying to "ignore" the license issue by installing The docker desktop app and bypassing it but apparently takes like 15 min just to install.
- I'm not sure if creating our own runner for this case would solve the problem or if we would have the same "licence issue" that GHA has.
@aguillenv aborting sounds good. we can put this back in the backlog for now. None of the options seem worth it for the amount of effort