nicholasdavidbrown
commented
7 months ago I am also seeing this behaviour (this year, as it was deploying fine last year up until mid December).
Only via my GitHub Actions CI/CD though. Deployment via the Azure CLI & extension in VSCode still works and is my workaround for the meantime to deploy functions. Although I still had to rollback my extension versions to get that to work lol see the accepted answer there if you need: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1462401/azure-functions-deployment-error-number-of-entries?source=docs
I have both SCM_DO_BUILD_DURING_DEPLOYMENT and ENABLE_ORYX_BUILD set to defaults (off). But turning them on made no difference. I also tried specifying minor versions of this repo to no avail.
This is my log during the final step of this package execution:
App setting SCM_DO_BUILD_DURING_DEPLOYMENT propagated to Kudu container
Setting ENABLE_ORYX_BUILD in Kudu container to false
Update using Client.updateAppSettingViaKudu
Response with status code 204
App setting ENABLE_ORYX_BUILD propagated to Kudu container
Package deployment using ZIP Deploy initiated.
Error: Failed to deploy web package to App Service.
Successfully updated deployment History at https://[XXX].scm.azurewebsites.net/api/deployments/a03eb5e918017f129c9dfcf55338fc157c0cbe0b1706508547974
Error: Execution Exception (state: PublishContent) (step: Invocation)
Error: When request Azure resource at PublishContent, zipDeploy : Failed to use D:\a\_temp\temp_web_package_6721177596420238.zip as ZipDeploy content
Error: Failed to deploy web package to App Service.
Internal Server Error (CODE: 500)
Error: Error: Failed to deploy web package to App Service.
Internal Server Error (CODE: 500)
at Kudu.<anonymous> (D:\a\_actions\Azure\functions-action\v1.3.2\node_modules\azure-actions-appservice-rest\Kudu\azure-app-kudu-service.js:175:23)
at Generator.next (<anonymous>)
at fulfilled (D:\a\_actions\Azure\functions-action\v1.3.2\node_modules\azure-actions-appservice-rest\Kudu\azure-app-kudu-service.js:5:58)
at runMicrotasks (<anonymous>)
at processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:96:5)
Error: Deployment Failed!EDIT: @craigomatic if it helps, my alternative was to use the webapp-deploy azure package instead, as both achieve essentially the same thing. Note: I am using a V4 function app with WEBSITE_RUN_FROM_PACKAGE set to 1.
Here's my new GH Action .yml file:
name: Develop branch CI/CD Pipeline - Building and Deploy API as ZIP to Azure (my-app)
on:
push:
branches:
- develop
workflow_dispatch:
env:
AZURE_FUNCTIONAPP_NAME: "my-app"
AZURE_FUNCTIONAPP_PACKAGE_PATH: "./release.zip"
NODE_VERSION: "20.x"
jobs:
build:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Set up Node.js version
uses: actions/setup-node@v3
with:
node-version: ${{ env.NODE_VERSION }}
- name: npm install, build, and test
run: |
npm install
npm run build
npm run test
- name: Zip artifact for deployment
run: zip release.zip ./* -r
- name: Upload artifact for deployment job
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3
with:
name: function-app
path: release.zip
deploy:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
needs: build
steps:
- name: Set up Node.js version
uses: actions/setup-node@v3
with:
node-version: ${{ env.NODE_VERSION }}
- name: Download artifact from build job
uses: actions/download-artifact@v3
with:
name: function-app
- name: "Deploy to Azure Web App"
id: deploy-to-webapp
uses: azure/webapps-deploy@v2
with:
app-name: ${{ env.AZURE_FUNCTIONAPP_NAME }}
slot-name: "production"
publish-profile: ${{ secrets.AZUREAPPSERVICE_PUBLISHPROFILE_DEV }}
package: ${{ env.AZURE_FUNCTIONAPP_PACKAGE_PATH }}
The ZIP file gets uploaded to /data/SitePackages as a ZIP which then triggered the server to restart and copy the ZIp contents over to /site/wwwroot.
My pipeline is now working fine.
craigomatic
ScotteYx
ckulka
I've started seeing these types of issue with some frequency. My GH action had been functioning earlier today and has stopped working in the past hour or so, blocking deployment with the following error in the logs:
Some of the jobs I have retried a few times and of those, some were then successful.
Not sure if there is a better place to report this?