Skip to content

Conversation

@HastD
Copy link

@HastD HastD commented Nov 29, 2025

The initramfs is not provided by an RPM package, but should be placed in its own exclusive layer. Therefore, it should be added to path_components, not path_packages, in the MappingBuilder, and should have component (not package) metadata associated to it.

(At least, that's the case if I've understood the code correctly... this is my first time contributing to rpm-ostree so I'm not 100% sure. I investigated this code path because I'm seeing the initramfs get placed into the "unpackaged contents" layer in images build with build-chunked-oci, rather than being placed into its own layer as expected.)

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly identifies that the initramfs should be treated as a component to ensure it's placed in its own layer. The change from path_packages to path_components is the right approach. I've added one comment with a suggestion to further improve the consistency of this change by aligning the metadata handling for initramfs with how other components are processed. This will make the code cleaner and more maintainable.

The initramfs is not provided by an RPM package, but should be placed in
its own exclusive layer. Therefore, it should be added to
`path_components`, not `path_packages`, in the `MappingBuilder`, and
should have component (not package) metadata associated to it.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Hast <hast.daniel@protonmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant