[SECURESIGN-232] [SECURESIGN-233] [SECURESIGN-234] | Fulcio custom pipeline config #78
Conversation
tommyd450
force-pushed
the
pipelinesConfig
branch
from
dd14258 to
7a06b76
Compare
tommyd450
force-pushed
the
pipelinesConfig
branch
from
7a06b76 to
fb74c4d
Compare
tommyd450
changed the title
|
/retest |
|
Confused why were not using the golang opnshift builder image but if registry go-tools image works thats fine. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Gregory-Pereira, JasonPowr, tommyd450 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
| # Add source code | ||
| ADD ./ $APP_ROOT/src/ | ||
|
|
||
| RUN go build -o server main.go | ||
| RUN CGO_ENABLED=1 go build -gcflags "all=-N -l" -o server_debug main.go |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are we removing the dubgging binary in the build process?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need it? There is no Red Hat documentation for it, and it wasn't used in any way in TP1. I think if we don't need to include it, let's don't just to keep the surface area as small as possible.
@Gregory-Pereira |
If we can stick to the older go version without any build problems, then we should. Occasional a repo will use a 1.21 feature and that's where we get stuck and have to revert to the openshift brew image. I don't think it's necessary in this case, and pulling from registry.redhat.io is preferred. |
|
@Gregory-Pereira I'm going to go ahead and merge this. If you want to pursue including the debug binary, we can do that in another PR. |
No description provided.