MCO-1977: Introduce RHEL9 and RHEL10 custom OS images

[cheesesashimi]

- What I did

The intention behind these images is to replace the inline Containerfile with both a RHEL9 and RHEL10 variant so that MCO e2e tests can use these images.

This PR does not touch any of the MCO codebase except for the TestOSImageURLOverride E2E test and the Makefile. Once this PR is merged, the TestOSImageURLOverride test will be skipped until openshift/release#71396 is merged. However, the openshift/release PR must be merged this PR is merged.

- How to verify it

1. Run the make custom-os-images Makefile target. Two images will be produced with the names localhost/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest and localhost/custom-os-image-rhel10:latest.
2. Tag and push the resulting RHEL9 image to a container registry of your choice. For the sake of this example, I'll use registry.hostname.com/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest.
3. Change to the e2e test directory: cd test/e2e-2of2
4. Run TestOSImageURLOverride: MCO_OS_IMAGE_URL_RHEL_9="registry.hostname.com/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest" go test -tags='containers_image_openpgp' -count=1 -timeout=45m -v -run=TestOSImageURLOverride .

- Description for the changelog
Introduce RHEL9 and RHEL10 custom OS images for OSImageURL test

[cheesesashimi]

/test verify

[openshift-ci]

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cheesesashimi: This pull request references MCO-1977 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

- What I did

The intention behind these images is to replace the inline Containerfile with both a RHEL9 and RHEL10 variant so that MCO e2e tests can use these images.

It is worth noting that aside from the new Makefile target, this does not (yet) touch any of the MCO codebase. Another

- How to verify it

Run the make custom-os-images Makefile target.

- Description for the changelog

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cheesesashimi: This pull request references MCO-1977 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

- What I did

The intention behind these images is to replace the inline Containerfile with both a RHEL9 and RHEL10 variant so that MCO e2e tests can use these images.

It is worth noting that aside from the new Makefile target, this does not (yet) touch any of the MCO codebase. This PR needs to be landed before openshift/release#71396 can be landed.

- How to verify it

Run the make custom-os-images Makefile target.

- Description for the changelog

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cheesesashimi: This pull request references MCO-1977 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

- What I did

The intention behind these images is to replace the inline Containerfile with both a RHEL9 and RHEL10 variant so that MCO e2e tests can use these images.

It is worth noting that aside from the new Makefile target, this does not (yet) touch any of the MCO codebase. This PR needs to merge before openshift/release#71396 can be merged.

- How to verify it

Run the make custom-os-images Makefile target.

- Description for the changelog

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cheesesashimi: This pull request references MCO-1977 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

- What I did

The intention behind these images is to replace the inline Containerfile with both a RHEL9 and RHEL10 variant so that MCO e2e tests can use these images.

This PR does not touch any of the MCO codebase except for the TestOSImageURLOverride E2E test and the Makefile. Once this PR is merged, the TestOSImageURLOverride test will be skipped until openshift/release#71396 is merged. However, the openshift/release PR must be merged this PR is merged.

- How to verify it

1. Run the make custom-os-images Makefile target. Two images will be produced with the names localhost/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest and localhost/custom-os-image-rhel10:latest.
2. Tag and push the resulting RHEL9 image to a container registry of your choice. For the sake of this example, I'll use registry.hostname.com/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest.
3. Change to the e2e test directory: cd test/e2e-2of2
4. Run TestOSImageURLOverride: MCO_OS_IMAGE_URL_RHEL_9="registry.hostname.com/custom-os-image-rhel9:latest" go test -tags='containers_image_openpgp' -count=1 -timeout=45m -v -run=TestOSImageURLOverride .

- Description for the changelog
Introduce RHEL9 and RHEL10 custom OS images for OSImageURL test

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[cheesesashimi]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cheesesashimi: This pull request references MCO-1977 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[pablintino]

Question: I'm maybe missing something, but, why do we need a tailscale repo?

[cheesesashimi]

This was an early proof-of-concept for installing non-standard software. It's not strictly needed and we could probably get away with just using yq and ripgrep instead.

EDIT: I'll remove Tailscale for now.

[pablintino]

/lgtm
/hold
The change looks good and reasonable to me, but I'd like have a bit more stable CI to be sure it doesn't have hidden gems.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cheesesashimi, pablintino

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [cheesesashimi,pablintino]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[cheesesashimi]

/retest-required

[openshift-ci]

@cheesesashimi: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-hypershift	d4a5db5	link	true	/test e2e-hypershift

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.