Skip to content
Closed
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions cli/command/manifest/util.go
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ var validOSArches = map[osArch]bool{
{os: "linux", arch: "amd64"}: true,
{os: "linux", arch: "arm"}: true,
{os: "linux", arch: "arm64"}: true,
{os: "linux", arch: "loong64"}: true,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

From my other comment on the ticket #7446 (comment)

This validation in general is probably doing too much; it probably shouldn't be aware of "known" platforms (or os/arch combinations); while the OCI has a list of known variants that should be supported, it does allow other values, so at most it should look for missing (empty) fields that are required, and malformed values, but otherwise be un-opinionated.

{os: "linux", arch: "ppc64le"}: true,
{os: "linux", arch: "mips64"}: true,
{os: "linux", arch: "mips64le"}: true,
Expand Down
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions contrib/completion/bash/docker
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4158,6 +4158,7 @@ _docker_manifest_annotate() {
arm64
mips64
mips64le
loong64
ppc64le
Comment on lines 4158 to 4162

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like this list was sorted, so loong64 should come before mips64

riscv64
s390x" -- "$cur" ) )
Expand Down
Loading