Add create-layer sub command to create filesystem changeset #8

coolljt0725 · 2016-09-18T04:05:39Z

This PR use a well tested pkg from github.com/containers/storage(which is forked from docker/docker)
from opencontainers/image-spec#280
here is an example:

$ oci-image-tool create-layer
One or two filesystems are required
Usage:
  oci-image-tool create-layer [child] [parent] [flags]

Flags:
  -h, --help   help for create-layer

$ tree rootfs-1
rootfs-1
├── bin
│   ├── my-app
│   └── my-tool
└── etc
    └── my-tool-cfg

2 directories, 3 files
[lei@fedora test]$ oci-image-tool create-layer rootfs-1
[lei@fedora test]$ ls
rootfs-1  rootfs-1.tar
[lei@fedora test]$ vim rootfs-1.tar
" tar.vim version v29
" Browsing tarfile /home/lei/test/rootfs-1.tar
" Select a file with cursor and press ENTER

bin/
bin/my-app
bin/my-tool
etc/
etc/my-tool-cfg
~

[lei@fedora test]$ cp -par rootfs-1 rootfs-1-s
[lei@fedora test]$ rm rootfs-1-s/bin/my-tool
[lei@fedora test]$ touch rootfs-1-s/bin/my-tool-1
[lei@fedora test]$ mkdir rootfs-1-s/etc/my-app-cfg.d
[lei@fedora test]$ touch rootfs-1-s/etc/my-app-cfg.d/cfg
[lei@fedora test]$ tree rootfs-1-s
rootfs-1-s
├── bin
│   ├── my-app
│   └── my-tool-1
└── etc
    ├── my-app-cfg.d
    │   └── cfg
    └── my-tool-cfg

3 directories, 4 files

[lei@fedora test]$ oci-image-tool create-layer rootfs-1-s/ rootfs-1
[lei@fedora test]$ ls
rootfs-1  rootfs-1-s  rootfs-1-s.tar  rootfs-1.tar
[lei@fedora test]$ vim rootfs-1-s.tar
" tar.vim version v29
" Browsing tarfile /home/lei/test/rootfs-1-s.tar
" Select a file with cursor and press ENTER

bin/
bin/.wh.my-tool
bin/my-tool-1
etc/
etc/my-app-cfg.d/
etc/my-app-cfg.d/cfg

wking · 2016-09-18T05:16:41Z

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 09:05:40PM -0700, Lei Jitang wrote:

Run make update-deps to update dependency
…
M vendor/github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/specs-go/config.go (44)
M vendor/github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/specs-go/state.go (2)
M vendor/github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/specs-go/version.go (2)

This pulls in the Linux → *Linux change from
opencontainers/runtime-spec#502. I think we want to make that bump an
explicit step, so we can catch up (e.g. updating runtimeSpec, which
currently uses s.Linux without initializing it because it couldn't
have been nil before).

wking · 2016-09-18T05:23:54Z

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 09:05:40PM -0700, Lei Jitang wrote:

This PR use a well tested pkg from
github.com/containers/storage(which is forked from docker/docker)

Pulling in containers/storage is much better than pulling in all of
Docker. But it's still doing a lot more than we need (just
pkg/archive). Maybe the containers folks would be interested in
moving that out into a containers/archive repository?

here is an example:
$ oci-image-tool create-layer

Now just oci-create-layer. And you should add an
oci-create-layer.1.md to go with your new command.

wking · 2016-09-18T05:24:15Z

cmd/oci-create-layer/main.go

+	}
+
+	cmd := &cobra.Command{
+		Use:   "create-layer [child] [parent]",


This should probably write the layer tar to stdout unless the user sets an option to write to a particular filename.

This will write the layer tar to the pwd.

Add an option to write to a particular filename is under working

wking · 2016-09-18T05:28:20Z

image/layer.go

+// layer and its parent layer which may be "".
+func Diff(child, parent string) (arch archive.Archive, err error) {
+	if parent == "" {
+		archive, err := archive.Tar(child, archive.Uncompressed)


Current image-spec requires gzipped layers, although there is some talk of weakening that in opencontainers/image-spec#316 (I'm in favor of making compression optional).

coolljt0725 · 2016-09-18T06:20:17Z

@wking

This pulls in the Linux → *Linux change from
opencontainers/runtime-spec#502. I think we want to make that bump an
explicit step, so we can catch up (e.g. updating runtimeSpec, which
currently uses s.Linux without initializing it because it couldn't
have been nil before).

I just want to avoid updating other packages when run make update-deps to vendor the github.com/containers/storage, I want the commit cb84b39 only contains the packages it relay on, so I run make update-deps first, then develop my commit. Maybe there is a way to update a specified package without updating all the packages?

Now just oci-create-layer. And you should add an
oci-create-layer.1.md to go with your new command.

This is under working

wking · 2016-09-18T07:00:31Z

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:20:18PM -0700, Lei Jitang wrote:

@wking

This pulls in the Linux → *Linux change from
opencontainers/runtime-spec#502. I think we want to make that
bump an explicit step, so we can catch up (e.g. updating
runtimeSpec, which currently uses s.Linux without initializing it
because it couldn't have been nil before).

I just want to avoid updating other packages when run make update-deps to vendor the github.com/containers/storage, I want
the commit cb84b39 only contains
the packages it relay on, so I run make update-deps first, then
develop my commit. Maybe there is a way to update a specified
package without updating all the packages?

I think you can just roll back the packages you don't want to bump
with ‘git checkout HEAD -- vendor/path/to/revert’ and manually resetting
portions of glide.lock. See 2b694a6 for an example of me doing that.

coolljt0725 · 2016-09-18T07:13:14Z

@wking thanks :)

runcom · 2016-09-18T07:23:48Z

@coolljt0725 can't you just require a specific version of a library in glide.yaml? What's the point if having a field named version if we have to git reset and checkout what we don't need..

wking · 2016-09-18T07:33:48Z

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:23:48AM -0700, Antonio Murdaca wrote:

@coolljt0725 can't you just require a specific version of a library
in glide.yaml?

Ah, there's a config file for this thing? ;). That's definitely a
better approach than what I was doing.

glestaris · 2016-09-20T12:53:21Z

I am very up for sharing a single unpacking implementation! I am not sure if this implementation should live outside of an opencontainers repository though. I would hope to see the image-tools becoming more of community maintained reference implementation in unpacking single layers.

Also, having to pull the whole containers/storage and its dependencies in image-tools makes me a bit sad as it's way more than what we need.

vbatts · 2016-09-20T13:14:59Z

On 20/09/16 05:53 -0700, George Lestaris wrote:

I am very up for sharing a single unpacking implementation! I am not sure if this implementation should live outside of an opencontainers repository though. I would hope to see the image-tools becoming more of community maintained reference implementation in unpacking single layers.

This is the intention of having this repo in the opencontainers org.

Also, having to pull the whole containers/storage and its dependencies in image-tools makes me a bit sad as it's way more than what we need.

perhaps there is a way to trim down that vendoring, such that only the
package used is pulled in?

glestaris · 2016-09-20T16:53:40Z

@vbatts let me try to become more specific. Once this PR is accepted we will be using github.com/containers/storage (or a subset of that) to make a changeset (layer). This will lead us in a situation where building a layer is done through a github.com/containers/storage implementation and unpacking a layer is done through the unpack method that currently lives in image/manifest.go.

This is unfortunately asymmetric. So I am worried that the natural next step would be to use github.com/containers/storage to deal with unpacking as well.

I may be overthinking this but it feels strange to see the layer creation be implemented in a different place than the layer unpacking.

wking · 2016-09-20T17:26:55Z

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:40AM -0700, George Lestaris wrote:

This is unfortunately asymmetric. So I am worried that the natural
next step would be to use github.com/containers/storage to deal
with unpacking as well.

I don't think it really matters where the reference implementation
lives, as long as we're not pulling in lots of unrelated stuff. The
test suites on the other hand, should be defined locally, so we can
distinguish between “the tested (un)packer is buggy” and
“containers/storage is buggy” when certifying third-party (un)packers.

I may be overthinking this but it feels strange to see the layer
creation be implemented in a different place than the layer
unpacking.

I agree.

coolljt0725 · 2016-09-21T01:20:24Z

@glestaris I'm agree what you said, I working on implementing the packing without vendoring third-party package

coolljt0725 · 2016-09-30T07:28:44Z

update without vendorring third-party package except logrus, most code are from docker/docker/pkg/archive, it is well tested.

wking · 2016-09-30T07:43:32Z

image/change.go

@@ -0,0 +1,283 @@
+// Copyright 2016 The Linux Foundation


We probably want to revisit this header, especially if we're going to be copying large chunks of files from places like docker/docker's pkg/archive/changes.go where the Linux Foundation is clearly not the primary copyright holder. How about:

Copyright 2016 The Linux Foundation and contributors

with the emphasis for this file being on “and contributors” ;).

And I'm still not wild about either forking these packages (like you're doing here) or vendoring huge external dependencies (like you were doing before). Is there really no interest inside Docker for moving this package out into a stand-alone docker/archive repository? Or in handing that off to us to develop as opencontainers/archive? I don't see docker/docker including github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/image to get this functionality back, but the other two solutions sound like they have a chance.

vbatts · 2016-10-06T16:20:50Z

please rebase and address the golint reportings

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

wking · 2016-10-13T22:06:44Z

cmd/oci-create-layer/oci-create-layer.1.md

+**oci-create-layer** [child] [parent] [flags]
+
+# DESCRIPTION
+`oci-create-layer` creates a filesystem changeset from two layers. It compares child with parent and generates a filsystem diff, pack the diff into a uncompressed tar archive. The output tar archive name is the child name with .tar suffix by default, use `--dest` to specify a custom one.


Can we write to stdout by default? Then with #5 you could:

$ oci-create-layer child-dir parent-dir | gzip | oci-cas put image-layout-dir

to push a layer into CAS without landing the uncompressed layer tarball on the disk.

@wking How about write to the stdout by default and use --dest to specify a custom destination?

Yeah, that sounds good to me. Although I think --output is a more popular name for this sort of thing than --dest.

cyphar · 2016-10-19T07:18:32Z

image/layer.go

+
+// CreateLayer cretes filesystem changset from child and parent
+func CreateLayer(child, parent, dest string) error {
+	arch, err := Diff(child, parent)


I would somewhat like to use @vbatts' go-mtree here. To be fair, I've been slacking on the required PRs to implement it, but would you be open to switching to go-mtree once it's up to snuff? The main benefit is that it has far more explicit design constraints about reproducibility and manifest verifiability than pkg/archive.

@cyphar The main purpose to use pkg/archive is it's well tested and have been used for a long time on docker. I'm personally ok to try to switch to go-mtree once it's up to snuff, but others may have different thoughts.

Another benefit of go-mtree that I forgot to mention is that you could make it possible to create layers without needing to keep two copies of the tree -- since mtree generates a manifest that you can compare against. So you could do something like:

% go-mtree -c -K sha256sum -p rootfs/ > before.mtree % # modify the rootfs % oci-image-tool --base before.mtree rootfs > layer.tar

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

cyphar · 2016-10-25T10:37:35Z

I've been playing with this for a while, it works pretty nice (especially with the CAS PR). I'm going to write a PR after this is merged to use go-mtree.

`oci-image-tool create` is confusing, rename it to `create-bundle`, and we may have `create-layer` in future which infligh in opencontainers#8, and we may have `create-image` in future. Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

`oci-image-tool create` is confusing, rename it to `create-bundle`, and we may have `create-layer` in future which is infligh in opencontainers#8 and we may have `create-image` in future. Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

zhouhao3 · 2017-10-12T05:40:33Z

Can you rebase this pr?

wking reviewed Sep 18, 2016

View reviewed changes

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch 3 times, most recently from 187382c to 664b97f Compare September 18, 2016 12:06

wking mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2016

independently unpacking layer functions #11

Closed

This was referenced Sep 21, 2016

[RFE] oci-image-tool: produce a layer archive #20

Open

[RFE] oci-image-tool: produce a layer archive opencontainers/image-spec#254

Closed

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch 4 times, most recently from e76f92a to a8bafa4 Compare September 30, 2016 07:26

wking reviewed Sep 30, 2016

View reviewed changes

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch from 2c1c223 to a8bafa4 Compare September 30, 2016 07:54

coolljt0725 added 2 commits October 8, 2016 21:43

Vendor Sirupsen

eb10149

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

Add create layer cmd to create filesystem changeset

1c001af

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

Fix golint warnings

953699f

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch from 8daf04f to 593085b Compare October 9, 2016 03:22

coolljt0725 added 2 commits October 8, 2016 23:36

Use pointer to avoid golint warning of copy lock

593085b

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

Add create layer test

f95665c

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch from 1b452a7 to 66e6cc3 Compare October 11, 2016 08:33

coolljt0725 added 2 commits October 11, 2016 04:47

Fix golint warnings

66e6cc3

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

Move changes.go and changes_unix.go to utils

c3071ab

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch from 70f6540 to a694c4e Compare October 11, 2016 09:16

Add oci-create-layer man pages

a694c4e

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

wking reviewed Oct 13, 2016

View reviewed changes

wking mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2016

Build story: producing an OCI image opencontainers/image-spec#396

Closed

cyphar reviewed Oct 19, 2016

View reviewed changes

coolljt0725 force-pushed the layer branch from 7181863 to 8f43e7a Compare October 24, 2016 12:12

Output to stdout by default

8f43e7a

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang <leijitang@huawei.com>

wking mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2016

image: Refactor to use cas/ref engines instead of walkers #5

Open

This was referenced Oct 25, 2016

add full documentation for new image tooling #53

Open

tools: need a tool to update/create manifests #59

Open

cyphar mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2016

umoci: implement repack opencontainers/umoci#9

Closed

wking mentioned this pull request Dec 21, 2016

config: forbid snapshotting of data volumes opencontainers/image-spec#504

Closed

xiekeyang mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2017

Bump version for v0.1.0 #116

Merged

wking mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2017

Increase the generate function #101

Open

wking mentioned this pull request Aug 30, 2017

doc.go: Perfect description #177

Merged

coolljt0725 mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2017

Rename oci-image-tool create to oci-image-tool create-bundle #182

Open

zhouhao3 mentioned this pull request Sep 26, 2017

ROADMAP for image-tools #187

Open

Azimshah approved these changes Jul 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add create-layer sub command to create filesystem changeset #8

Add create-layer sub command to create filesystem changeset #8

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

wking Sep 18, 2016

coolljt0725 Sep 18, 2016

wking Sep 18, 2016

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016 •

edited

Loading

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

runcom commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

glestaris commented Sep 20, 2016

vbatts commented Sep 20, 2016

glestaris commented Sep 20, 2016

wking commented Sep 20, 2016

coolljt0725 commented Sep 21, 2016

coolljt0725 commented Sep 30, 2016

wking Sep 30, 2016

vbatts commented Oct 6, 2016

wking Oct 13, 2016

coolljt0725 Oct 14, 2016

wking Oct 14, 2016

cyphar Oct 19, 2016

coolljt0725 Oct 19, 2016

cyphar Oct 24, 2016

cyphar commented Oct 25, 2016

zhouhao3 commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Add create-layer sub command to create filesystem changeset #8

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add create-layer sub command to create filesystem changeset #8

Conversation

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016 • edited Loading

coolljt0725 commented Sep 18, 2016

runcom commented Sep 18, 2016

wking commented Sep 18, 2016

glestaris commented Sep 20, 2016

vbatts commented Sep 20, 2016

glestaris commented Sep 20, 2016

wking commented Sep 20, 2016

coolljt0725 commented Sep 21, 2016

coolljt0725 commented Sep 30, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vbatts commented Oct 6, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cyphar commented Oct 25, 2016

zhouhao3 commented Oct 12, 2017 • edited Loading

wking commented Sep 18, 2016 •

edited

Loading

zhouhao3 commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading