Change e2e-test dockerfile

[code-elinka]

To support multiarch, e2e-test dockerfile
should have non-arch dependant packages.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @code-elinka. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[code-elinka]

/assign @panslava

[code-elinka]

/cc @cezarygerard

[aojea]

common pattern for multiarch image is to use the env variable to build the url, see this example https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kind/blob/7d26b50a129faf1a7024ce1337d516aada1db118/images/base/Dockerfile#L32

curl https://dl.google.com/dl/cloudsdk/channels/rapid/downloads/google-cloud-sdk-206.0.0-linux-$TARGET_ARCH.tar.gz

don't know if it is needed, but if the new URL download binaries without the right architecture it will fail, or is the new approach installer handling this internally?

[aojea]

it seems the sdk shows how to do it here

https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/cloud-sdk-docker/blob/master/emulators/Dockerfile

[code-elinka]

Okay! Thank you. I added two vars:

• ARCH
• CLOUD_SDK_VERSION

And removed lines with installations, kept only downloading the directory.

[code-elinka]

I am also not sure if it is used at all :D

https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/blob/master/config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-network/ingress-gce-e2e.yaml

[cezarygerard]

/ok-to-test

[code-elinka]

@aojea @cezarygerard @panslava Do you have other comments?

[panslava]

@code-elinka in general looks good to me, but being honest, I am not really in the context of the issue this PR solves, let's assign to Cezary and Antonio

/assign @cezarygerard
/assign @aojea

[code-elinka]

@aojea Please check. I hope the list of comments will help to brush off the dust from this PR 😸

[aojea]

/lgtm
/approve

let's iterate on this

[aojea]

I don't have approval here XD

[aojea]

ddi you rebase on the latest master?

[code-elinka]

ddi you rebase on the latest master?

@aojea Yes, I rebased on your no-alpine changes.

https://github.com/code-elinka/ingress-gce/commits/multiarch

[code-elinka]

/assign @swetharepakula @spencerhance

Could you please take a look? I changed debian version and gcloud-cli link (so it doesn't depend on architecture).

[k8s-ci-robot]

@code-elinka: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: spencerhance.

Note that only kubernetes members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

/assign @swetharepakula @spencerhance

Could you please take a look? I changed debian version and gcloud-cli link (so it doesn't depend on architecture).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[aojea]

/lgtm

[aojea]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, code-elinka

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [aojea]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment