Skip to content

Conversation

@googlyrahman
Copy link
Member

Automated: Migrate paths from gsutil to gcloud storage

This CL is part of the on going effort to migrate from the legacy gsutil tool to the new and improved gcloud storage command-line interface. gcloud storage is the recommended and modern tool for interacting with Google Cloud Storage, offering better performance, unified authentication, and a more consistent command structure with other gcloud components. 🚀

Automation Details

This change was generated automatically by an agent that targets users of gsutil.
The transformations applied are based on the gsutil to gcloud storage migration guide.

⚠️ Action Required: Please Review and Test Carefully

While we have based the automation on the migration guide, every use case is unique.
It is crucial that you thoroughly test these changes in environments appropriate to your use-case before merging.
Be aware of potential differences between gsutil and gcloud storage that could impact your workflows.
For instance, the structure of command output may have changed, requiring updates to any scripts that parse it. Similarly, command behavior can differ subtly; the gcloud storage rsync command has a different file deletion logic than gsutil rsync, which could lead to unintended file deletions.

Our migration guides can help guide you through a list of mappings and some notable differences between the two tools.

Standard presubmit tests are run as part of this CL's workflow. If you need to target an additional test workflow or require assistance with testing, please let us know.

Please verify that all your Cloud Storage operations continue to work as expected to avoid any potential disruptions in production.

Support and Collaboration

The GCS CLI team is here to help! If you encounter any issues, have a complex use case that this automated change doesn't cover, or face any other blockers, please don't hesitate to reach out.
We are happy to work with you to test and adjust these changes as needed.

Contact: [email protected]

We appreciate your partnership in this important migration effort!

cc: @sushantkhanna

@googlyrahman googlyrahman requested a review from a team as a code owner October 16, 2025 11:22
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @googlyrahman, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request is an automated effort to modernize the codebase by migrating all instances of the legacy gsutil command-line tool to the gcloud storage interface within various Jupyter notebooks. This change ensures consistency with current Google Cloud recommendations, potentially offering improved performance and a more unified authentication experience. Reviewers are encouraged to thoroughly test the changes, especially given potential subtle behavioral differences between the two tools.

Highlights

  • Migration to gcloud storage: This pull request automates the migration of gsutil commands to their gcloud storage equivalents across multiple Jupyter notebooks, aligning with the recommended modern tool for Google Cloud Storage interactions.
  • Command Replacements: Key gsutil commands such as mb (make bucket), ls (list), cp (copy), rm (remove), and cat (concatenate) have been systematically replaced with gcloud storage buckets create, gcloud storage ls, gcloud storage cp, gcloud storage rm, and gcloud storage cat respectively.
  • IAM Policy Changes: The gsutil iam ch command for managing IAM policies has been updated to gcloud storage buckets add-iam-policy-binding, with inline comments noting the increased complexity of migrating IAM scripts due to differing command structures.
  • Recursive Operations and Error Handling: Many rm commands now explicitly use --recursive and, in some cases, --continue-on-error flags for more robust deletion of buckets and objects, reflecting best practices with gcloud storage.
  • Output Format Differences: A specific change in model_garden_pytorch_mixtral_deployment.ipynb highlights that the output format for gcloud storage ls --full differs from gsutil ls -Lb, requiring awareness for scripts parsing command output.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@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 automates the migration from gsutil to gcloud storage commands across several Jupyter notebooks. The automated changes are largely correct and align with the migration guide. However, I've identified two issues that need attention. One is a high-severity bug in notebooks/community/model_garden/model_garden_pytorch_mixtral_deployment.ipynb where a grep command will fail due to a case-sensitivity issue when parsing gcloud output. The second is a critical JSON syntax error in notebooks/official/pipelines/custom_model_training_and_batch_prediction.ipynb that will prevent the notebook from loading correctly. Please see the detailed comments for suggestions on how to fix these issues.

Comment on lines 373 to 374
# Note: Migrating scripts using gsutil iam ch is more complex than get or set. You need to replace the single iam ch command with a series of gcloud storage bucket add-iam-policy-binding and/or gcloud storage bucket remove-iam-policy-binding commands, or replicate the read-modify-write loop.
! gcloud storage buckets add-iam-policy-binding $BUCKET_URI --member=serviceAccount:{SERVICE_ACCOUNT} --role=roles/storage.objectViewer ]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

critical

This change introduces a JSON syntax error into the notebook file. The note and the gcloud command are not properly quoted as strings within the source array of the cell. This will cause the notebook to fail to load. Each line within the source array must be a valid JSON string.

        "# Note: Migrating scripts using gsutil iam ch is more complex than get or set. You need to replace the single iam ch command with a series of gcloud storage bucket add-iam-policy-binding and/or gcloud storage bucket remove-iam-policy-binding commands, or replicate the read-modify-write loop.",
        "! gcloud storage buckets add-iam-policy-binding $BUCKET_URI --member=serviceAccount:{SERVICE_ACCOUNT} --role=roles/storage.objectViewer"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[Resolved] removed note and formatted command

" shell_output = ! gsutil ls -Lb {BUCKET_NAME} | grep \"Location constraint:\" | sed \"s/Location constraint://\"\n",
" bucket_region = shell_output[0].strip().lower()\n",
" # Note: The format of the full listing output is different. gcloud storage uses a title case for keys and will not display a field if its value is \"None\".\n",
" shell_output = ! gcloud storage ls --full --buckets {BUCKET_NAME} | grep \"Location constraint:\" | sed \"s/Location constraint://\"\n", " bucket_region = shell_output[0].strip().lower()\n",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

high

The grep command is case-sensitive and is looking for Location constraint:, but the note on the previous line correctly states that gcloud storage uses title case for keys. The output from gcloud storage ls --full --buckets will be Location Constraint:, causing this grep command to fail and break the logic for retrieving the bucket region.

    shell_output = ! gcloud storage ls --full --buckets {BUCKET_NAME} | grep "Location Constraint:" | sed "s/Location Constraint://"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[Resolved] fixed

@gericdong gericdong merged commit 3239b30 into GoogleCloudPlatform:main Dec 24, 2025
4 of 5 checks passed
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.

3 participants