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

Using remote builds with buildbarn #3317

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

Conversation

gfleury
Copy link

@gfleury gfleury commented Dec 14, 2024

Using remote builds with buildbarn (bb-deployment with docker-compose)

Changes were made accordingly to existing project already using please, so they might be biased (wrong).
So, these changes are more like questions.

  • Ignore symlinks while checking outputs. This one seems a legit fix.

  • Use sri.checksums only if just one hash is available. bb-remote-asset currently only takes one hash and I could not find anything defining if multiple hashes are good or not.

  • Entrypoints checks on outputs considering OutputPaths. Currently we have multiple targets with entrypoints, and some have outs and other output_dirs. The ones with output_dirs seems to forced to have these dirs in the entrypoints path.

…t one hash is available. Entrypoints checks on outputs considering OutputPaths.
@peterebden
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for this! Nice to know the remote execution subsystem is getting exercised by others as well :D

I think the other two parts make a lot of sense but the subresource integrity change is a bit of an issue. I'm pretty sure we do take advantage of it as is; I also think that it's pretty misleading if one hash applies SRI but two hashes suddenly don't.
I do think the format should be fine though, per MDN:

Note: An integrity value may contain multiple hashes separated by whitespace. A resource will be loaded if it matches one of those hashes.

I assume we could get in touch with Ed about having bb-remote-asset support multiple values?

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