Re: [PATCH 07/12] CI: Introduce a debian:12-ppc64le container

[Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 12:15:12PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> diff --git a/automation/build/debian/12-ppc64le.dockerfile 
> b/automation/build/debian/12-ppc64le.dockerfile
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..3b311e675ef5
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/automation/build/debian/12-ppc64le.dockerfile
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
...
> +ENV CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64le-linux-gnu-
> +ENV XEN_TARGET_ARCH=ppc64

I don't really like these two envvars. The second one is already set in
the env by gitlab, the first one could in theory also come from
gitlab-ci.

But I guess that comment comes from the fact that I don't really know
why we would want a second bookworm containers with only a few packages.

> +
> +RUN <<EOF
> +#!/bin/bash
> +    set -e
> +
> +    useradd --create-home user
> +
> +    apt-get -y update
> +
> +    DEPS=(
> +        # Xen
> +        bison
> +        build-essential
> +        checkpolicy
> +        flex
> +        gcc-powerpc64le-linux-gnu
> +        python3-minimal
> +
> +        # Qemu for test phase
> +        qemu-system-ppc
> +    )
> +
> +    apt-get -y --no-install-recommends install "${DEPS[@]}"
> +    rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*

Other containers do also `apt-get clean` is this not needed? Or maybe
the original containers is setup to not save packages?

/me looking into /var/cache

Looks empty enough, so I guess `apt-get clean` is optional.

Changes looks good enough, so:
Reviewed-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>

Cheers,

-- 

Anthony Perard | Vates XCP-ng Developer

XCP-ng & Xen Orchestra - Vates solutions

web: https://vates.tech