On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 13:58:10 +0200 Miguel Ojeda <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 11:45 AM Guillaume Tucker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Add scripts/Makefile.container to wrap the make command in a > > container using the CONTAINER= variable to specify the image name. > > For example: > > > > make -f scripts/Makefile.container CONTAINER=korg-gcc defconfig > > > > The container image name is entirely arbitrary and the container > > tool may be Docker, Podman or any other compatible alternative > > specified by the CONTAINER_COMMAND variable. The default is set to > > docker for now. > > IIUC, this wraps reruns `make` inside the container, but it means > hardcoding a particular tool and path, right? (unless one sets even > more variables) > > The cover letter says one can create an alias for this, but one could > also do that for the underlying call anyway, unless I am missing > something. And if we do this, then I would prefer one doesn't need to > type `-f ...`. > > Put another way, for a user, what is the benefit of having this extra > way of running in a container? For instance, I could see the benefit > if different tools had different flags or it was a complicated > procedure, but I think at least `podman` shares the flags used here. > > Should this instead be a document inside `Documentation/` somewhere > that explains how to do this, pitfalls, advanced options, etc. and > give example command lines for different tools? > > If we do end up with `CONTAINER=`, then I think it should make it work > without having to pass `-f ...`, to make it easier. Or, even better, > like the KUnit script, we could have a script that does the right > thing and reads a config from the user, so that one can just type > something like, picking whatever tooling the user configured (e.g. > Docker vs. Podman, default image, etc.): > > scripts/container.py defconfig > I think this functionality would be better implemented as a script (like you mentioned) rather than a Makefile. The current approach is likely to run into several practical issues (e.g. file permission mismatches between host and container, the need to manually remove containers with `docker rm`, etc.) and addressing all of these reliably in Makefile can become quite messy. Writing a python (or even perl) script would make it much easier to maintain. Also, it can be self-documented quite nicely with `scripts/container.py --help` command. Regards, Onur > Thanks! > > Cheers, > Miguel
