chore(deps): bump golang version to 1.26#2712
Conversation
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
📝 WalkthroughSummary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughGo toolchain version upgraded from 1.25 to 1.26 across module declarations, Docker build images, CI workflows, linter configuration, and user documentation. All files consistently updated to reference Go 1.26 or 1.26.2 depending on context. ChangesGo 1.26 Toolchain Upgrade
🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool's configuration or disable the tool if it's a critical failure. 🔧 golangci-lint (2.12.2)level=warning msg="[linters_context] gocritic: no need to enable check "commentFormatting": it's already enabled" Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
.openshift-ci/e2e-runtime/Dockerfile (1)
1-1:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winMissing platform specification for linux/amd64.
The base image does not specify a target platform. Per coding guidelines, container images should be built for
linux/amd64platform. As per coding guidelines, "Build container images for linux/amd64 platform" for Dockerfile*.📝 Proposed fix
-FROM quay.io/centos/centos:stream9 +FROM --platform=linux/amd64 quay.io/centos/centos:stream9🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In @.openshift-ci/e2e-runtime/Dockerfile at line 1, Update the Dockerfile base image declaration to target the linux/amd64 platform by adding the platform specification to the FROM instruction (the existing FROM quay.io/centos/centos:stream9 line); ensure the FROM line is changed so the image build explicitly uses --platform=linux/amd64 (or equivalent Dockerfile platform syntax) to comply with the "Build container images for linux/amd64 platform" guideline.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@Dockerfile`:
- Line 1: Update the FROM instruction in the Dockerfile to use a fixed platform
instead of the build-time variable: replace the current
--platform=$BUILDPLATFORM with --platform=linux/amd64 in the FROM line that
defines the build stage (the existing "FROM ... AS build" instruction), so the
image is always built for linux/amd64 per guidelines; keep the same base image
tag/sha and stage name unchanged and rerun your build to verify no breakage.
---
Outside diff comments:
In @.openshift-ci/e2e-runtime/Dockerfile:
- Line 1: Update the Dockerfile base image declaration to target the linux/amd64
platform by adding the platform specification to the FROM instruction (the
existing FROM quay.io/centos/centos:stream9 line); ensure the FROM line is
changed so the image build explicitly uses --platform=linux/amd64 (or equivalent
Dockerfile platform syntax) to comply with the "Build container images for
linux/amd64 platform" guideline.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Central YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited)
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 64b7003c-85fc-4c46-803e-2a921bce0c27
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
.github/workflows/aws-integration.yaml.github/workflows/ci.yaml.github/workflows/emailsender-central-compatibility.yaml.golangci.yml.openshift-ci/e2e-runtime/DockerfileCLAUDE.mdDockerfileREADME.mdemailsender/Dockerfilego.modprobe/Dockerfiletools/go.mod
| @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
| FROM --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.25.9@sha256:e06a6f4c85c3ca75f64127542449c9770fb885adfb592f987c576d268ac108de AS build | |||
| FROM --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.26.2@sha256:a82d974dae02330d0669fb0a5ced2ae498bd1bd708359d61493b9fb0dc0748eb AS build | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Platform specification conflicts with coding guidelines.
The --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM allows dynamic platform selection, but the coding guidelines specify that container images should be built for linux/amd64 platform. Consider using --platform=linux/amd64 instead to ensure consistent builds. As per coding guidelines, "Build container images for linux/amd64 platform" for Dockerfile*.
📝 Proposed fix
-FROM --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.26.2@sha256:a82d974dae02330d0669fb0a5ced2ae498bd1bd708359d61493b9fb0dc0748eb AS build
+FROM --platform=linux/amd64 registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.26.2@sha256:a82d974dae02330d0669fb0a5ced2ae498bd1bd708359d61493b9fb0dc0748eb AS build📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| FROM --platform=$BUILDPLATFORM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.26.2@sha256:a82d974dae02330d0669fb0a5ced2ae498bd1bd708359d61493b9fb0dc0748eb AS build | |
| FROM --platform=linux/amd64 registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/go-toolset:1.26.2@sha256:a82d974dae02330d0669fb0a5ced2ae498bd1bd708359d61493b9fb0dc0748eb AS build |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@Dockerfile` at line 1, Update the FROM instruction in the Dockerfile to use a
fixed platform instead of the build-time variable: replace the current
--platform=$BUILDPLATFORM with --platform=linux/amd64 in the FROM line that
defines the build stage (the existing "FROM ... AS build" instruction), so the
image is always built for linux/amd64 per guidelines; keep the same base image
tag/sha and stage name unchanged and rerun your build to verify no breakage.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The platform selection is made dynamic on purpose to build images on arm chips (mac developer laptops)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kovayur, understood — using $BUILDPLATFORM makes sense for cross-compilation support so developers on ARM Macs can build without emulation. I'll withdraw that comment.
📝 Learnings were identified and not saved (knowledge base disabled). Enable
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
2 similar comments
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
|
||
| FROM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/ubi-minimal:9.7@sha256:12db9874bd753eb98b1ab3d840e75de5d6842ac0604fbd68c012adefe97140be as standard | ||
|
|
||
| RUN microdnf install shadow-utils |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The build is stuck because it prompts to upgrade an existing package:
Upgrading:
shadow-utils-2:4.9-16.el9.x86_64 ubi-9-baseos-rpms 1.3 MB
replacing shadow-utils-2:4.9-15.el9.x86_64
Transaction Summary:
Installing: 0 packages
Reinstalling: 0 packages
Upgrading: 1 packages
Obsoleting: 0 packages
Removing: 0 packages
Downgrading: 0 packages
Is this ok [y/N]:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stupid q but... did we not need this package?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It already exists in the base image
|
|
||
| FROM registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/ubi-minimal:9.7@sha256:12db9874bd753eb98b1ab3d840e75de5d6842ac0604fbd68c012adefe97140be as standard | ||
|
|
||
| RUN microdnf install shadow-utils |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stupid q but... did we not need this package?
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ebensh, kovayur The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
2 participants
Description
Checklist (Definition of Done)
Test manualROX-12345: ...Test manual
TODO: Add manual testing efforts