Skip to content

feat(docs): add point about chiselled deb slices#620

Open
lczyk wants to merge 1 commit intocanonical:mainfrom
lczyk:add-rocks-security-manifest
Open

feat(docs): add point about chiselled deb slices#620
lczyk wants to merge 1 commit intocanonical:mainfrom
lczyk:add-rocks-security-manifest

Conversation

@lczyk
Copy link
Contributor

@lczyk lczyk commented Sep 18, 2025

Ping the @canonical/rocks team.


Description

I've added an item to the IMAGE_MAINTAINER_AGREEMENT which more clearly specifies that we also want manifests in chiselled rocks + added a link to the rocks-security-manifest repo.

@@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ and stating:
```

- if this deb-based security manifest is not present, the Maintainer **acknowledges** that it *might* be automatically added by the Build system, consequently adding a new OCI layer to the Ubuntu Rock.
Copy link
Member

@alesancor1 alesancor1 Sep 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In fact, the script presented above these lines may be old - @clay-lake can you confirm the script from https://github.com/canonical/rocks-security-manifest already cover the use cases for custom debs, apart from slices? If so, we can rewrite these 3 points as a single one:

if the Ubuntu Rock has additional .deb packages on top of the Ubuntu base, and/or chisel slices are being installed, then it must include a security manifest /usr/share/rocks/dpkg.query generated via https://github.com/canonical/rocks-security-manifest

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.

2 participants