-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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
Investigate UBI-micro for Ansible, Helm and SDK base images #6652
Comments
@fgiloux Thanks for raising this issue. We do not have a full picture on what needs to be done to move to ubi-micro. To get started, we would just have to swap the base image, check if the tests pass and proceed with debugging the issues. This is an investigative feature. It would be helpful if someone from the community could take this up. |
Hi @varshaprasad96 Thanks for the feedback. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
/remove-lifecycle rotten |
Feature Request
Describe the problem you need a feature to resolve.
UBI-micro has a few advantages compared to UBI-minimal
In addition it is not uncommon for image scanners to report vulnerabilities against versions of UBI-minimal. Even if they may be false positives it still creates burden for investigating them and makes acceptance more difficult on user side.
Describe the solution you'd like.
This is a follow up of #5619
Using UBI-micro would help with the points mentioned above.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: