-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
tools/docker: add missing node in syz-env #5034
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Hi @jiangenj . |
Hi @tarasmadan
The error is |
Got it. The goal is to test the changes locally. Thank you for this option. |
Yes It's fine to use only make presubmit if you don't want to add npm into the docker. |
It is Ok to add Node. |
Could you please also adjust the documentation? |
updated. |
I also tried to run
@jiangenj, does it work for you? |
I can run successfully, the error in your output generally means you are behind a proxy or not able to access deb.debian.org in docker. |
Thank you for the docker build attempt. |
act(https://github.com/nektos/act) is used to build github workflow locally. When running `act -j build` in local host, it reports: exec failed: unable to start container process: exec: "node": executable file not found in $PATH: unknown. Adding nodejs package can fix the build error. Updated docs with act usage too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
install nodejs instead of npm to have less packages installed.
To be honest, I'm not sure we really want to add a nodejs dependency to our Docker containers.
If you are talking about the recent weeks, By the way, I'm curious why the CI tests are not automatically run on your PRs - I thought it's enough to have submitted one commit so that we don't have to manually approve CI runs anymore. And you have submitted quite a lot of commits already.. @tarasmadan do you know what else needs to be done? |
I think there is no harm to support act run, right? I think there is some approve setting in the project setting to allow ci only after approval? As stated in the link https://docs.github.com/en/actions/managing-workflow-runs/reviewing-deployments. |
P.S. |
@@ -437,3 +437,6 @@ check_diff: | |||
|
|||
check_shebang: | |||
./tools/check-shebang.sh | |||
|
|||
act: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe install the tool in the Dockerfile (and in install_prerequisites) and in make act
just run it instead of installing it?
I think it would be more in line with the other tests in the Makefile.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
act will start docker from these ci.yml, so it needs to be installed on host.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see, thanks for the clarification
When act -j build in local host, it reports:
exec failed: unable to start container process: exec: "node": executable file
not found in $PATH: unknown
Before sending a pull request, please review Contribution Guidelines:
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/docs/contributing.md