Skip to content

Commit 140291c

Browse files
committed
ci: smoke-test - grant packages:read so reusable discover_versions can run
The Smoke Test workflow ran on PR #400 head commit and concluded as startup_failure with 0 jobs. That's GH Actions failing to validate the workflow before any container spawns. Compared against every other workflow that calls _discover-versions.yml (simple, cmdline, multi-compiler, fips-ready, sanitizers, seed-src), smoke-test.yml is the only one with a workflow-level 'permissions: contents: read' block. The reusable _discover-versions.yml job declares 'permissions: { contents: read, packages: read }' for its oras login ghcr.io step. Workflow-level permissions clamp every job including reusable workflows, so the discover_versions job ended up with strictly fewer permissions than it declared, which trips startup validation. Grant packages:read at the workflow level so the reusable workflow's declared permissions can be satisfied. Keep the explicit block instead of removing it - the other working workflows just rely on the repo default token, but smoke-test.yml should stay explicit since it's the gate everything else waits on.
1 parent e5226fb commit 140291c

1 file changed

Lines changed: 6 additions & 0 deletions

File tree

.github/workflows/smoke-test.yml

Lines changed: 6 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -22,8 +22,14 @@ concurrency:
2222
group: smoke-${{ github.workflow }}-${{ github.event.pull_request.number || github.ref }}
2323
cancel-in-progress: true
2424

25+
# _discover-versions.yml (the reusable workflow we call below) declares
26+
# permissions: { contents: read, packages: read } for its `oras login
27+
# ghcr.io` step. Workflow-level permissions clamp every job including
28+
# reusable workflows, so we must grant packages:read here or the
29+
# discover_versions job startup_failures before any container spawns.
2530
permissions:
2631
contents: read
32+
packages: read
2733

2834
jobs:
2935
discover_versions:

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)