codeship-library/google-cloud-utilities

Outdated version of the kubectl client

isaac-peka opened this issue · 8 comments

Hey there

For some reason the kubectl client installed is outdated, which means we don't have kubectl apply which is the recommended way for updating deployments.

If you run kubectl version inside this container you'll get back:

Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"0", GitVersion:"v1.0.6", GitCommit:"388061f00f0d9e4d641f9ed4971c775e1654579d", GitTreeState:"clean"}
Server Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"3", GitVersion:"v1.3.7", GitCommit:"a2cba278cba1f6881bb0a7704d9cac6fca6ed435", GitTreeState:"clean"}

The latest version of the client isv1.3.7.

Its strange, because I can see you have a run directive for gcloud components update kubectl inside the Dockerfile. Is the image stored on dockerhub the same as what's here on github?

ping @mlocher - at the moment as a quick fix I'm just updating the client in a script but it's non-cacheable and adds some time to our builds

Hey @sampeka, thanks for reminding me :)

We've finally updated the dockercfg generator via codeship-library/gcr-dockercfg-generator#2 and I'll prepare a PR to update this container next.

Any updates on this one?

@mlocher ping

How I can contribute to make this happen really fast (I see you merge only pulls from contributors)? We use gcloud components update kubectl hack to make it work but after today's update it just don't work:

ERROR: gcloud failed to load: No module named apitools.base.protorpclite

Can I expect help from you guys anytime soon?

Hi there, It looks like I'm encountering this issue as well.

I'm trying to deploy to GKE using codeship/google-cloud-deployment, and the error I get suggests that kubectl is at quite an old version, as set image is not a valid command.

Yup, confirmed, it's quite an old kubectl version:

$ kubectl version -c
Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"0", GitVersion:"v1.0.6", GitCommit:"388061f00f0d9e4d641f9ed4971c775e1654579d", GitTreeState:"clean"}

Confirmed, this is fixed with #6.

We also added regular tasks to rebuild the image, so this shouldn't happen again :)