fix: match EC2 instance type to source AMI architecture in dry run#649
Open
gnought wants to merge 1 commit intohashicorp:mainfrom
Open
fix: match EC2 instance type to source AMI architecture in dry run#649gnought wants to merge 1 commit intohashicorp:mainfrom
gnought wants to merge 1 commit intohashicorp:mainfrom
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
During EC2 dry-run, packer currently uses a default
t3.nanoinstance type which does not match the architecture of the source AMI. This causes the dry-run fail.The derivation of instance type should be based on the source architecture. If not matched, use
t3.nanoin default.A excerpt of packer log:
Resolved Issues
If your PR resolves any open issue(s), please indicate them like this so they will be closed when your PR is merged:
Rollback Plan
If a change needs to be reverted, we will roll out an update to the code within 7 days.
Changes to Security Controls
Are there any changes to security controls (access controls, encryption, logging) in this pull request? If so, explain.
No