fix: enable building for openbsd, dragonfly, and solaris/illumos #1135

Merged

mfenniak merged 2 commits from :main into main 2025-11-11 01:32:49 +00:00

Conversation 7 Commits 2 Files changed 10 +11 -11

alexrp commented 2025-11-10 15:15:12 +00:00

Contributor

Copy link

What it says on the tin. No idea if it actually runs; I'll find out in the near future when I source CI machines running these OSs.

• bug fixes
  • PR: fix: enable building for openbsd, dragonfly, and solaris/illumos

What it says on the tin. No idea if it actually runs; I'll find out in the near future when I source CI machines running these OSs. <!--start release-notes-assistant--> <!--URL:https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner--> - bug fixes - [PR](https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/1135): <!--number 1135 --><!--line 0 --><!--description Zml4OiBlbmFibGUgYnVpbGRpbmcgZm9yIG9wZW5ic2QsIGRyYWdvbmZseSwgYW5kIHNvbGFyaXMvaWxsdW1vcw==-->fix: enable building for openbsd, dragonfly, and solaris/illumos<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant-->

alexrp commented 2025-11-10 15:16:45 +00:00

Author

Contributor

Copy link

Note that, for solaris/illumos, this also requires: https://github.com/moby/go-archive/pull/17

I'm not sure what to do about that; that package looks abandoned.

Note that, for solaris/illumos, this also requires: https://github.com/moby/go-archive/pull/17 I'm not sure what to do about that; that package looks abandoned.

mfenniak commented 2025-11-10 16:44:47 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

When you're confident that this builds, I don't mind merging it. 👍

But I'm sure you'll understand that without any CI support in this repo, regressions of this will occur in the future and it won't be known. Support will be at a "I hope it works and I'm happy to review and merge PRs to fix things" level.

When you're confident that this builds, I don't mind merging it. 👍 But I'm sure you'll understand that without any CI support in this repo, regressions of this will occur in the future and it won't be known. Support will be at a "I hope it works and I'm happy to review and merge PRs to fix things" level.

alexrp commented 2025-11-10 16:59:08 +00:00

Author

Contributor

Copy link

When you're confident that this builds, I don't mind merging it. 👍

I know it builds for openbsd and dragonfly. I just don't know what to do about solaris/illumos since that go-archive dependency appears unmaintained. I could use some advice on how to move forward on that front.

But I'm sure you'll understand that without any CI support in this repo, regressions of this will occur in the future and it won't be known. Support will be at a "I hope it works and I'm happy to review and merge PRs to fix things" level.

That's fine.

I'll note that it's straightforward to cross-compile the runner for a bunch of different targets by just setting GOARCH and GOOS when invoking go build - that's what I did downstream. So even if you don't run the test suite, you could verify that it at least builds. But it's also fine if you'd rather not do it that way; we'll discover and fix any build issues when we upgrade our runners anyway.

> When you're confident that this builds, I don't mind merging it. :+1: I know it builds for openbsd and dragonfly. I just don't know what to do about solaris/illumos since that go-archive dependency appears unmaintained. I could use some advice on how to move forward on that front. > But I'm sure you'll understand that without any CI support in this repo, regressions of this will occur in the future and it won't be known. Support will be at a "I hope it works and I'm happy to review and merge PRs to fix things" level. That's fine. I'll note that it's straightforward to cross-compile the runner for a bunch of different targets by just setting `GOARCH` and `GOOS` when invoking `go build` - that's what I did [downstream](https://codeberg.org/ziglang/runner/releases/tag/v11.3.1). So even if you don't run the test suite, you *could* verify that it at least builds. But it's also fine if you'd rather not do it that way; we'll discover and fix any build issues when we upgrade our runners anyway.

mfenniak commented 2025-11-10 20:06:59 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

Ah, I see, sorry I missed that comment about go-archive. My first thought is to replace it with https://github.com/mholt/archives, which is used by Forgejo and seems to be well maintained. I don't know off hand if it has any issues compiling for these platforms though. Since go-archive isn't used anywhere other than docker_build.go, it probably isn't a difficult replacement.

I'd guess that your usage of these additional platforms will be using the host executor? Another approach might be to invert the logic in these build checks and don't include Docker support for these platforms... then go-archive won't be referenced since it's only touched in docker_build.go.

Regarding cross-compiling, that's an interesting idea. If there are any non-Free tools required for building Illumos it might be a no-go for that platform, but I assume that wouldn't be the case for the others.

Ah, I see, sorry I missed that comment about go-archive. My first thought is to replace it with https://github.com/mholt/archives, which is used by Forgejo and seems to be well maintained. I don't know off hand if it has any issues compiling for these platforms though. Since go-archive isn't used anywhere other than `docker_build.go`, it probably isn't a difficult replacement. I'd guess that your usage of these additional platforms will be using the host executor? Another approach might be to invert the logic in these build checks and don't include Docker support for these platforms... then `go-archive` won't be referenced since it's only touched in `docker_build.go`. Regarding cross-compiling, that's an interesting idea. If there are any non-Free tools required for building Illumos it might be a no-go for that platform, but I assume that wouldn't be the case for the others.

alexrp commented 2025-11-10 20:23:45 +00:00

Author

Contributor

Copy link

Ah, I see, sorry I missed that comment about go-archive. My first thought is to replace it with https://github.com/mholt/archives, which is used by Forgejo and seems to be well maintained. I don't know off hand if it has any issues compiling for these platforms though. Since go-archive isn't used anywhere other than docker_build.go, it probably isn't a difficult replacement.

Well... maybe not, but I've never actually written a line of Go in my life. 😅

I'd guess that your usage of these additional platforms will be using the host executor?

Right.

Another approach might be to invert the logic in these build checks and don't include Docker support for these platforms... then go-archive won't be referenced since it's only touched in docker_build.go.

Now that I look a bit closer, it seems like Docker for Solaris isn't even a thing... or for NetBSD for that matter. DragonFly is a bit unclear, but I would guess no.

So this seems like a reasonable thing to do in any case.

Regarding cross-compiling, that's an interesting idea. If there are any non-Free tools required for building Illumos it might be a no-go for that platform, but I assume that wouldn't be the case for the others.

illumos is fully open source to my knowledge; it was forked from OpenSolaris before Oracle took over Solaris and effectively sentenced it to death by making the source code unavailable and subsequently laying off most of the development team.

> Ah, I see, sorry I missed that comment about go-archive. My first thought is to replace it with https://github.com/mholt/archives, which is used by Forgejo and seems to be well maintained. I don't know off hand if it has any issues compiling for these platforms though. Since go-archive isn't used anywhere other than `docker_build.go`, it probably isn't a difficult replacement. Well... maybe not, but I've never actually written a line of Go in my life. 😅 > I'd guess that your usage of these additional platforms will be using the host executor? Right. > Another approach might be to invert the logic in these build checks and don't include Docker support for these platforms... then `go-archive` won't be referenced since it's only touched in `docker_build.go`. Now that I look a bit closer, it seems like Docker for Solaris isn't even a thing... or for NetBSD for that matter. DragonFly is a bit unclear, but I would guess no. So this seems like a reasonable thing to do in any case. > Regarding cross-compiling, that's an interesting idea. If there are any non-Free tools required for building Illumos it might be a no-go for that platform, but I assume that wouldn't be the case for the others. illumos is fully open source to my knowledge; it was forked from OpenSolaris before Oracle took over Solaris and effectively sentenced it to death by making the source code unavailable and subsequently laying off most of the development team.

alexrp force-pushed main from 5b4b2d01ab to 9c1cf35e07 2025-11-10 20:42:53 +00:00 Compare

alexrp commented 2025-11-10 20:48:40 +00:00

Author

Contributor

Copy link

Should be ready for review. The runner now builds for every 'desktop' OS that Go supports except aix, hurd, plan9, and zos. Of those, only aix and plan9 have cross-compilation support. I don't personally care about aix or zos.

❯ GOARCH=ppc64 GOOS=aix go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo'
github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5/osfs
# github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5/osfs
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5@v5.6.2/osfs/os_posix.go:17:14: undefined: unix.Flock
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5@v5.6.2/osfs/os_posix.go:24:14: undefined: unix.Flock
❯ GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=plan9 go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo'
github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin
go.etcd.io/bbolt
# github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin@v0.6.0/join.go:145:114: undefined: syscall.ELOOP
github.com/docker/go-connections/sockets
# github.com/docker/go-connections/sockets
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/sockets.go:16:38: undefined: syscall.RawSockaddrUnix
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket.go:67:20: undefined: syscall.Unlink
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket_unix.go:50:23: undefined: syscall.Umask
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket_unix.go:52:10: undefined: syscall.Umask
# go.etcd.io/bbolt
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:248:11: undefined: flock
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:492:11: undefined: mmap
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:546:12: undefined: munmap
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:659:12: undefined: fdatasync
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:706:14: undefined: funlock
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:1093:9: undefined: fdatasync
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/mlock_unix.go:14:17: undefined: unix.Mlock
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/mlock_unix.go:32:17: undefined: unix.Munlock
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:566:13: undefined: fdatasync
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:613:13: undefined: fdatasync
../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:613:13: too many errors
❯ GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=hurd go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo'
go: unsupported GOOS/GOARCH pair hurd/amd64
❯ GOARCH=s390x GOOS=zos go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo'
go: unsupported GOOS/GOARCH pair zos/s390x

Should be ready for review. The runner now builds for every 'desktop' OS that Go supports except aix, hurd, plan9, and zos. Of those, only aix and plan9 have cross-compilation support. I don't personally care about aix or zos. ``` ❯ GOARCH=ppc64 GOOS=aix go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo' github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5/osfs # github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5/osfs ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5@v5.6.2/osfs/os_posix.go:17:14: undefined: unix.Flock ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/go-git/go-billy/v5@v5.6.2/osfs/os_posix.go:24:14: undefined: unix.Flock ❯ GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=plan9 go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo' github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin go.etcd.io/bbolt # github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/cyphar/filepath-securejoin@v0.6.0/join.go:145:114: undefined: syscall.ELOOP github.com/docker/go-connections/sockets # github.com/docker/go-connections/sockets ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/sockets.go:16:38: undefined: syscall.RawSockaddrUnix ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket.go:67:20: undefined: syscall.Unlink ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket_unix.go:50:23: undefined: syscall.Umask ../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/docker/go-connections@v0.6.0/sockets/unix_socket_unix.go:52:10: undefined: syscall.Umask # go.etcd.io/bbolt ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:248:11: undefined: flock ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:492:11: undefined: mmap ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:546:12: undefined: munmap ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:659:12: undefined: fdatasync ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:706:14: undefined: funlock ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/db.go:1093:9: undefined: fdatasync ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/mlock_unix.go:14:17: undefined: unix.Mlock ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/mlock_unix.go:32:17: undefined: unix.Munlock ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:566:13: undefined: fdatasync ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:613:13: undefined: fdatasync ../../go/pkg/mod/go.etcd.io/bbolt@v1.4.3/tx.go:613:13: too many errors ❯ GOARCH=amd64 GOOS=hurd go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo' go: unsupported GOOS/GOARCH pair hurd/amd64 ❯ GOARCH=s390x GOOS=zos go build -v -tags 'netgo osusergo' go: unsupported GOOS/GOARCH pair zos/s390x ```

❤️ 1

mfenniak approved these changes 2025-11-11 01:32:39 +00:00

mfenniak merged commit 918be4d0d7 into main 2025-11-11 01:32:49 +00:00

mfenniak referenced this pull request from a commit 2025-11-11 01:32:50 +00:00

fix: enable building for openbsd, dragonfly, and solaris/illumos (#1135)

mfenniak referenced this pull request 2025-11-14 16:49:36 +00:00

Windows compatibility fixes #1152

mfenniak added the

Kind/Enhancement

label 2025-11-21 16:10:43 +00:00

forgejo-mirror referenced this pull request from a commit 2025-11-23 15:01:30 +00:00

Update module code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/v11 to v12 (forgejo) (#10213)

viceice-bot referenced this pull request 2025-11-28 05:31:32 +00:00

Update forgejo-runner to v12 (major) #1191

mfenniak referenced this pull request from a commit 2025-11-28 14:21:02 +00:00

Update forgejo-runner to v12 (major) (#1191)

viceice-bot referenced this pull request from actions/setup-forgejo 2025-12-27 15:07:34 +00:00

Update dependency forgejo/runner to v12 #800

Gottox referenced this pull request from forgejo/forgejo-actions-feature-requests 2026-05-01 17:19:24 +00:00

Ship binaries for supported *BSD platforms #111

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No reviewers

mfenniak

Labels

Clear labels   

FreeBSD

  

Kind/Breaking

Breaking change that won't be backward compatible

  

Kind/Bug

Something is not working

  

Kind/Chore

It is no fun but it needs to be done, this is a chore.

  

Kind/DependencyUpdate

for pull requests that are created by renovate when updating a dependency

  

Kind/Documentation

Documentation changes

  

Kind/Enhancement

Improve existing functionality

  

Kind/Feature

New functionality

  

Kind/Security

This is security issue

  

Kind/Testing

Issue or pull request related to testing

  

Priority

Critical

The priority is critical

  

Priority

High

The priority is high

  

Priority

Low

The priority is low

  

Priority

Medium

The priority is medium

  

Reviewed

Confirmed

Issue has been confirmed

  

Reviewed

Duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  

Reviewed

Invalid

Invalid issue

  

Reviewed

Won't Fix

This issue won't be fixed

  

Status

Abandoned

Somebody has started to work on this but abandoned work

  

Status

Blocked

Something is blocking this issue or pull request

  

Status

Need More Info

Feedback is required to reproduce issue or to continue work

  

Windows

Windows ports is an independent project, see https://github.com/Crown0815/Forgejo-runner-windows-builder

  

linux-powerpc64le

powerpc64le

  

linux-riscv64

  

linux-s390x

  

run-end-to-end-tests

Run https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/end-to-end with a runner compiled from this pull request

  

run-forgejo-tests

Run https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo tests importing the runner from this pull request

No labels

FreeBSD

Kind/Breaking

Kind/Bug

Kind/Chore

Kind/DependencyUpdate

Kind/Documentation

Kind/Enhancement

Kind/Feature

Kind/Security

Kind/Testing

Priority

Critical

Priority

High

Priority

Low

Priority

Medium

Reviewed

Confirmed

Reviewed

Duplicate

Reviewed

Invalid

Reviewed

Won't Fix

Status

Abandoned

Status

Blocked

Status

Need More Info

Windows

linux-powerpc64le

linux-riscv64

linux-s390x

run-end-to-end-tests

run-forgejo-tests

Milestone

Clear milestone

No items

No milestone

Assignees

Clear assignees

No assignees

2 participants

Notifications

Subscribe

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

forgejo/runner!1135

No description provided.