runner-images VS changed-files

Yeah this is a good option if you'd like something to deploy yourself! You can also build an AMI from GitHub's upstream image definition (https://github.com/actions/runner-images/tree/main/images/ub...) if you'd like it to match what's available in GitHub-hosted Actions.

With Depot, we're moving towards deeper performance optimizations and observability than vanilla GitHub runners - we've integrated the runners with a cache storage cluster for instance, and we're working on deeper integration with the compute platform that we built for distributed container image builds - as well as expanding the types of builds we can process beyond Actions and Docker, for instance.

But different options will be better for different folks, and the `philips-labs` project is good at what it does.

Whoa, there's a lot of stuff in there [1] that gets installed straight from vendors, without pinning content checksums to a value known-good to Github.

I get it, they want to have the latest versions instead of depending on how long Ubuntu (or, worse, Debian) package maintainers take to package stuff into their mainline repositories... but this attack surface is nuts.

[1] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/tree/main/images/ub...

I had a similar experience with ARC (actions-runner-controller).

One of the machines in the fleet failed to sync its clock via NTP. Once a job X got scheduled to it, the runner pod failed authentication due to incorrect clock time, and then the whole ARC system started to behave incorrectly: job X was stuck without runners, until another workflow job Y was created, and then X got run but Y became stuck. There were also other wierd behaviors like this so I eventually rebuilt everything based on VMs and stopped using ARC.

Using VMs also allowed me to support the use of the official runner images [0], which is good for compatibility.

I feel more people would benefit from managed "self-hosted" runners, so I started DimeRun [1] to provide cheaper GHA runners for people who don't have the time/willingness to troubleshoot low-level infra issues.

[0]: https://github.com/actions/runner-images

Reminds me: Still waiting for native ARM support on GitHub Actions https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/5631

Used https://github.com/actions/runner-images to get the packages needed for Ubuntu 22.04 As the packer requires a builder, I used "null" builder to set it as localhost ref: https://developer.hashicorp.com/packer/docs/builders/null (It was way difficult to figure it out the 1st time) I had to modify the .pkr.hcl file to pick my provisioners. I could not understand the use of /opt/hostedtoolcache folder (which I did later)

We need to add two additional steps. The first one is to retrieve all new files, and the second one is to run the enhanced config only on the new files. In this example the third-party GitHub Action called changed-files is used to obtain the new files. In the GitHub Marketplace for Actions, there is a considerable number of similar actions with similar functionality. You can choose the one that suits you best, as the functionality is more or less the same for all of them.

I determined this after dozens of attempts working with the other GitHub Action, tj-actions/changed-files which feeds a list of modified files to clang-format-lint.

GitHub actions has actions that do similar, I’ve used this one before with great success: https://github.com/tj-actions/changed-files

You could also clean up your changed files job by using this (https://github.com/tj-actions/changed-files) or something similar. That would at least make it easier to understand what it's supposed to be doing. You can use it to get the directories containing any changed package.json files. Then use that output as as a matrix input.

View on GitHub