frr: Remove FRR container creation #67
Conversation
The container is not used at the moment. Remove related files and definitions from the repository. Signed-off-by: Quentin Monnet <[email protected]>
|
| priority | nix_package | version_local | version_nixpkgs | version_upstream |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | mimalloc | 2.1.7 | 2.1.8 | 3.0.1 |
| 11 | llvm | 19.1.4 | 17.0.6 | 19.1.7 |
| 11 | llvm | 19.1.4 | 19.1.5 | 19.1.7 |
| 10 | isl | 0.20 | 0.24 | 0.27 |
| 10 | compiler-rt-libc | 19.1.4 | 19.1.5 | |
| 7 | libnl | 3.10.0 | 3.10.0 | 3.11.0 |
| 7 | openssl | 3.3.2 | 1.1.1w | 3.4.0 |
| 7 | openssl | 3.3.2 | 3.3.2 | 3.4.0 |
| 6 | libxcrypt | 4.4.36 | 4.4.36 | 4.4.38 |
| 5 | ncurses | 6.4.20221231 | 6.4.20221231 | 6.5 |
| 5 | curl | 8.11.0 | 8.11.0 | 8.11.1.3;8.11.1_3;8.11.1 |
| 4 | numactl | 2.0.18 | 2.0.18 | 2.0.19 |
| 4 | kmod | 31 | 31 | 33 |
| 4 | sqlite | 3.46.1 | 3.47.0 | 3.48.0 |
| 3 | libbpf | 1.4.7 | 1.4.7 | 1.5.0 |
| 2 | dpdk | 24.11 | 24.07 | 24.11.1 |
Vulnerable packages (gnu64):
|
I was not aware that this was in this repo. Happy to review it ! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me @qmonnet , thanks.
A pity that 362f54f cannot be reverted cleanly.
I have to finish the work on building FRR images from our repo, both for development and production. So far I have not used using nix nor just. I may port what I have if folks prefer that tooling (.... but can't promise 😃 ).
|
I'm ok with this one if we prefer the other tooling. That said, I do think nix is a very strong choice for this task. If we want to remove frr here we should also remove a few other things added to support it. As @Fredi-raspall pointed out, the commit which introduced these changes was not ideal. Perhaps we should discuss in our next meeting and I can explain my thinking on why I chose that particular approach. Note that the original motive was just to understand the FRR plugin system. |
|
| priority | nix_package | version_local | version_nixpkgs | version_upstream |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | mimalloc | 2.1.7 | 2.1.8 | 3.0.1 |
| 11 | llvm | 19.1.4 | 17.0.6 | 19.1.7 |
| 11 | llvm | 19.1.4 | 19.1.6 | 19.1.7 |
| 10 | coreutils | 9.5 | 9.5 | 9.6 |
| 10 | isl | 0.20 | 0.24 | 0.27 |
| 7 | openssl | 3.3.2 | 1.1.1w | 3.4.0 |
| 7 | openssl | 3.3.2 | 3.3.2 | 3.4.0 |
| 6 | libxcrypt | 4.4.36 | 4.4.36 | 4.4.38 |
| 5 | ncurses | 6.4.20221231 | 6.4.20221231 | 6.5 |
| 5 | perl | 5.40.0 | 5.40.0 | 5.40.1 |
| 4 | tzdata | 2024b | 2024b | 2025a |
| 4 | kmod | 31 | 31 | 33 |
| 4 | numactl | 2.0.18 | 2.0.18 | 2.0.19 |
| 4 | sqlite | 3.46.1 | 3.47.2 | 3.48.0 |
| 2 | dpdk | 24.11 | 24.07 | 24.11.1 |
Vulnerable packages (gnu64):
|
I'm fine keeping it as well if there's any motivation for it, I didn't mean we have to remove it - I was mostly trying to clean up the repo (and the generated container images). Yep, let's discuss it next time |
|
What is the status of this PR? Are we closing it, or fixing the signoff error, reviewing, and merging? |
|
Personally I don't mind either way. I opened this to clean up the repo, because I thought we had no reason to keep these bits. If there's any interest in keeping them for now, for using the FRR container here or just as an example workflow for building the container, we can close the PR. I was a bit hasty to clean up stuff last time, after all. |
|
I vote that we close this for now. I think this feature will be helpful shortly |
|
Closing as per Daniel's suggestion. |
As far as I understand, the container is not used at the moment. Remove related files and definitions from the repository.
If I'm wrong and if we want to keep the container, now or for the near future, feel free to ignore and close the PR :)