[519] Cross-arch builds: builders variables - #907

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c482289 and b32d654.

• packages/system/cozystack-controller/Makefile (1 hunks)
• scripts/common-envs.mk (1 hunks)

• GitHub Check: Build and Test

scripts/common-envs.mk (1)

18-23:

Details

❓ Verification inconclusive

Solid approach for dynamically determining builder and platforms

The implementation for determining the Docker buildx builder and supported platforms is well thought out. Using the buildx inspect command to extract platform information is a practical approach.

A few considerations:

1. The parsing of command output (egrep, sort, sed) is functional but potentially brittle if Docker CLI output formats change
2. The commented-out JSON parsing alternative could be more stable long-term, as previously discussed in the PR comments

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify that the platform detection works correctly with various builder setups

echo "Testing platform detection..."
BUILDER=$(jq -r '.Name' ~/.docker/buildx/current 2>/dev/null || echo "default")
echo "Current builder: $BUILDER"

# Verify the platform detection works
PLATFORMS=$(docker buildx inspect --bootstrap $BUILDER 2>/dev/null | egrep '^Platforms:' | egrep -o 'linux/amd64|linux/arm64' | sort -u | xargs | sed 's/ /,/g')
echo "Detected platforms: $PLATFORMS"

# Verify that the command doesn't break with different builders
docker buildx ls | awk '{print $1}' | grep -v "^NAME" | while read builder; do
  echo "Testing with builder: $builder"
  PLATFORMS=$(docker buildx inspect --bootstrap $builder 2>/dev/null | egrep '^Platforms:' | egrep -o 'linux/amd64|linux/arm64' | sort -u | xargs | sed 's/ /,/g')
  echo "  - Detected platforms: $PLATFORMS"
done

Length of output: 590

---

Manual verification required for Docker Buildx platform detection

The sandbox environment doesn’t include Docker or Buildx, so the verification script couldn’t produce any platforms. Please test this locally in an environment with Docker Buildx installed:

• Run

  BUILDER=$(jq -r '.Name' ~/.docker/buildx/current)
  docker buildx inspect --bootstrap "$BUILDER" \
    | egrep '^Platforms:' \
    | egrep -o 'linux/amd64|linux/arm64' \
    | sort -u \
    | xargs | sed 's/ /,/g'

  and confirm it outputs the expected comma-separated platforms.
• Repeat for each builder returned by docker buildx ls.
• Evaluate the commented JSON-parsing alternative:

  PLATFORM ?= $(shell jq -r '.Nodes[] | .Platforms | map(.os + "/" + .architecture) | join(",")' \
    ~/.docker/buildx/instances/$(BUILDER))

  to see if it yields more stable results over future Docker CLI changes.

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b32d654 and 7fbe18b.

• packages/core/platform/bundles/paas-full.yaml (1 hunks)
• packages/system/cozystack-controller/Makefile (1 hunks)
• packages/system/kubevirt/templates/kubevirt-cr.yaml (1 hunks)
• scripts/common-envs.mk (1 hunks)

• packages/system/cozystack-controller/Makefile
• scripts/common-envs.mk

• GitHub Check: Build and Test

packages/system/kubevirt/templates/kubevirt-cr.yaml (1)

13-15: Conditional inclusion of cpuAllocationRatio is correct; ignore YAMLlint false positives.

The Helm snippet properly wraps cpuAllocationRatio under developerConfiguration only when .Values.cpuAllocationRatio is set. The indentation (6 spaces under developerConfiguration) aligns with sibling keys like featureGates. The YAMLlint errors here are false positives caused by Helm directives and can be safely ignored.

Please validate via Helm:

helm lint packages/system/kubevirt
helm template test-release packages/system/kubevirt

🧰 Tools

🪛 YAMLlint (1.35.1)

[warning] 14-14: wrong indentation: expected 4 but found 6

(indentation)

---

[error] 13-13: syntax error: expected the node content, but found '-'

(syntax)