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

packages: add mdadm package for software RAID support #4035

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2024

Conversation

tzneal
Copy link
Contributor

@tzneal tzneal commented Jun 5, 2024

Issue number:

Closes #

Description of changes:

Adds the mdadm package to support future software raid configuration of local ephemeral storage.

Testing done:

  • Built/ran an AMI and used an admin container to run mdadm and configure local storage.
  • cargo make check

Terms of contribution:

By submitting this pull request, I agree that this contribution is dual-licensed under the terms of both the Apache License, version 2.0, and the MIT license.

packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@bcressey bcressey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good overall.

As a general packaging note: udev rules and systemd units are places where unexpected dependencies can hide, so they're worth a close look.

Comment on lines 1 to 3
# This file is automatically @generated by Cargo.
# It is not intended for manual editing.
version = 3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This file should be removed - it gets created if you accidentally run cargo make in a package directory.

Comment on lines 1 to 3
# This file is automatically @generated by Cargo.
# It is not intended for manual editing.
version = 3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove this Cargo.lock

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Without this, cargo make -e PACKAGE=mdadm build-package fails. What am I missing?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good question, and I too have this problem with cargo make build-package. It's not just you, and it's not just this package. I'll let you know as soon as I have an answer. Or, possibly, @bcressey will answer us both before I figure it out, as he does.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good news: thanks to @yeazelm I know when we introduced this misbehavior in our build system. The somewhat good news is that there is a workaround: if you build a variant that includes this package (e.g., you add it to the packages in the aws-dev variant and build that variant), the build system will happily build your package without a Cargo.lock file, as it builds the variant you have selected. I will see what we can do about making cargo make build-package work as intended, and update this pull request.

packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/mdadm/mdadm.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bcressey bcressey merged commit 52a9f82 into bottlerocket-os:develop Jun 13, 2024
31 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants