From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8008A1FF17C for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2025 10:09:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9D44B10004; Wed, 25 Jun 2025 10:10:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 10:10:11 +0200 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: Filip Schauer Message-ID: References: <20250611144903.200940-1-f.schauer@proxmox.com> <20250611144903.200940-3-f.schauer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.080 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-perl-rs v2 02/11] add Perl mapping for OCI container image parser/extractor X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 09:59:08AM +0200, Filip Schauer wrote: > On 24/06/2025 14:51, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > > > + #[export] > > > + pub fn parse_and_extract_image( > > > + oci_tar_path: &str, > > > + rootfs_path: &str, > > > + ) -> Result, Error> { > > > + match proxmox_oci::parse_and_extract_image(oci_tar_path, rootfs_path) { > > > + Ok(config) => Ok(Some(config.unwrap_or_default())), > > > + Err(err) => match err { > > > + ProxmoxOciError::ParseError(ParseError::NotAnOciImage(_)) => Ok(None), > > ^ Why are we doing this? > > In the Perl code of the create_vm API method at PVE::API2::LXC, if a > .tar file is used as the container template, > PVE::RS::OCI::parse_and_extract_image is first attempted. > It returns undef, when the .tar file is not an OCI image. Thus we deduce > that the file is an LXC template. If some other kind of error occurrs, > (e.g. I/O error) then the Perl code should die. > > The point is, there needs to be a way to differentiate between the file > actually being an LXC template, and some general failure. Given how the errors in the oci-spec work I think it would make more sense to do this detection separately by simply looking for an `oci-layout` file in the archive (or looking for all of `oci-layout`, `blobs`, `index.json` at only the top level). An an error in the OCI data should not cause us to try to extract this as a regular container either. In the long run, this needs to be a separate content type anyway, since don't want to just extract tar files like this. Rather, we want to later also add the ability to use the base image via overlayfs. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel