-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Failed to build an image if dockerfile
contains "future" output values
#96
Comments
Thanks for filing this issue and the PR @xunleii! I'm going to defer to @blampe to review the PR (he should be able to take a look next week), but we should be able to make this scenario work. (We may want to be a little more explicit about threading through the unknowns since when we do support build on preview.) |
Thanks for your response @mjeffryes. That's right, I forgot that we have the flag
I will also try to add some test to validate these possible behavior. |
After testing on my side, it seems that there is a guard to prevent any build during preview if the entries contains unknown values ( pulumi-docker-build/provider/internal/image.go Lines 716 to 719 in 4e8cf8f
Thanks to this check and because this issue is related to unknown data inside a Dockerfile, I think my changes should not impact the |
@xunleii do you still see the issue with |
Unfortunately, I have the same issue with this version (
EDIT: I still have this issue trying to create the image with |
@xunleii thanks for confirming, and thank you for the PR! I will take a look. The proposal in #103 is reasonable, although I worry about the situation where the user has omitted Dockerfile information, but a default Dockerfile ( |
@blampe thanks for your review. I created this repo (A Codespace is possible if you want to test it on your browser) to test all possible cases I found. From what I've seen, #103 hasn't added any regressions but has two new unexpected behaviors when the Docker file contains As you pointed out, we are currently unable to distinguish unknwon from empty values until pulumi/pulumi-go-provider#155 is resolved and I haven't found a better alternative for this. For my personal use, I will keep a fork with my patch because I know what the limitations are, but otherwise I propose to wait until the issue in question is resolved. |
What happened?
To give some context, I'm trying to “modify” images on the fly to inject files directly into a previously created image. To do this, I need to reference a previous image into the
dockerfile
field (see example).Unfortunately,
pulumi
doesn't seem to appreciate this behavior and tries to search for a Dockerfile, as if thedockerfile
were empty :Example
Output of
pulumi about
Additional context
No response
Contributing
Vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction.
To contribute a fix for this issue, leave a comment (and link to your pull request, if you've opened one already).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: