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

add arm64 support #13

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

add arm64 support #13

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

odidev
Copy link

@odidev odidev commented Jun 29, 2022

The following file has been created and modified:

Added support for arm64 in .travis.yml to make docker images and publish them on docker hub.

Note: I have not added the e2e-testing for the arm64 platform because e2e-testing requires minikube to run on travis for arm64 platform. And travisCI does not support minikube on the arm64 platform. There is an open issue for this in kubernetes/minikube.

Signed-off-by: odidev [email protected]

Signed-off-by: subham <[email protected]>
@odidev
Copy link
Author

odidev commented Jul 27, 2022

Hi Team,
A gentle reminder to take a look at the above changes.

Comment on lines +24 to +41
- stage: build-arm
arch: arm64
script: ./.ci/build.sh
- stage: e2e-test-arm
arch: arm64
install: ./.ci/e2e-test/setup.sh
if: tag IS present OR commit_message =~ /perform-e2e/
script: ./.ci/e2e-test/test.sh
env:
- CHANGE_MINIKUBE_NONE_USER=true
- MINIKUBE_WANTUPDATENOTIFICATION=false
- MINIKUBE_WANTREPORTERRORPROMPT=false
- MINIKUBE_HOME=$HOME
- CHANGE_MINIKUBE_NONE_USER=true
- KUBECONFIG=$HOME/.kube/config
- stage: publish-arm
arch: arm64
script: ./.ci/publish.sh
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like a code duplication to me. Do you think we could avoid that somehow?

Copy link
Collaborator

@semekh semekh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for your contribution. Generally LGTM, but it'd be great if we could avoid the code duplication.

@odidev
Copy link
Author

odidev commented Sep 29, 2022

Looks like a code duplication to me. Do you think we could avoid that somehow?

I think we need to go with this only because when I try to reduce the duplication it does not run for all the stages.

@odidev
Copy link
Author

odidev commented Oct 19, 2022

Hi Team,
Adding a gentle reminder to take a look at the above changes.

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.

2 participants