Tthis absolutely does not work
T
Tam i missing something?
Jthread this pls!
Ttrue.
Rhey ublue folks
how did you get the bootc-image-builder to work with bluefin-lts?
I'm getting this, but I would think bluefin would get a similar def file error for
did you trick it into using centos somehow?
how did you get the bootc-image-builder to work with bluefin-lts?
I'm getting this, but I would think bluefin would get a similar def file error for
bluefin-41 since there aren't any defs for bluefin eithercannot build manifest: cannot get manifest: could not find def file for distro secureblue-41did you trick it into using centos somehow?
Rim using your action, too https://github.com/ublue-os/bootc-image-builder-action/blob/main/action.yml
something doesn't add up
something doesn't add up
Tits something in-image, the action doesnt do anything special
RWe didn't need to do any tricking or anything - it "just worked".
Perhaps you're changing something we're not?
Perhaps you're changing something we're not?
Rif anything we're doing less branding
Rhmm
Ryeah i thought it was os-release
Ri may have to read the image builder code smh
Tits kinda crazy we actually made this work LOL
TheliumOS also ran into that issue
Rlike.. our /etc/os-release modifications were "stolen" directly from bluefin, it should be identical 
Tman i think its /usr/lib/os-release?
R
Tthat absolutely looks like it
Rthey're identical
Rhmm
Tnvm we edited that on bluefin:lts too
Rmaybe it's because there's no def for fedora 41
Rbut there is for centos
R:thonk:
RRThis is where those defs are matched against
Ryeah, so bluefin should have the same issue
Ri think
Rsince osrelease id is "bluefin" for which there is no def
R
Tliterally that
JI just add a manifest on my fork of image builder lol. Seems crazy to have a list per OS in the public version of bib
R
I just add a manifest on my fork of image builder lol.
why didn't i think of this lmao
RI'd open an issue in the osbuild/bootc-image-builder repo. Requiring each distro or image that wants to use BIB to have a file in their repo isn't very scalable
JI did? Or maybe commented. They said they are happy to add more
RRsmall world
RCreated this to remind them and start a discussion
https://github.com/osbuild/bootc-image-builder/issues/816
https://github.com/osbuild/bootc-image-builder/issues/816
GitHub
Do we want to add manifests for all custom images? I can imageing the list becoming very long. Or should there be some way to pass it in to the build? Probably a bit of both; I see no real necessit...
JThe base image specifies a bib image it wants to use too, weird that it doesn't specify what OS it is https://gitlab.com/fedora/bootc/base-images/-/blob/main/fedora-bootc-config.json?ref_type=heads
AI ended up just making copies of the manifests locally and bind-mounting them into the container 
but yeah, it's a wild choice. even just being able to pass an option to specify "use this manifest" vs letting it try to auto-detect would be nice
but yeah, it's a wild choice. even just being able to pass an option to specify "use this manifest" vs letting it try to auto-detect would be nice
Othe UTF-8 error is fixed by rechunking with hhd-dev/rechunk
Owhy
Tprobably something changed
Tit does not get fixed specifically because of that tho, bluefin rechunks and it still got that issue
OI mean
Oit fixed it in the case of my image
