search

actions / runner-images

GitHub Actions runner images
MIT License
9.81k stars 3.01k forks source link

windows-arm lacks bash AND pwsh, as well as git itself. #10479

Open lilith opened 3 weeks ago

lilith commented 3 weeks ago

Description

Using paid runners, windows-arm is truly useless, lacking bash and powershell and git.

Platforms affected

Runner images affected

Image version and build link

Current runner version: '2.319.1' Runner name: 'windows-11-arm-32gb_442e95740f94' Runner group name: 'Imageflow' Machine name: 'runner' VM Image OS: Windows (arm64) Source: Marketplace Publisher: MicrosoftWindowsDesktop Offer: windows11preview-arm64 Plan: win11-23h2-ent Version: 22631.4037.240811

Is it regression?

na

Expected behavior

it should have git/bash/pwsh

Actual behavior

it lacks basic tools

Repro steps

Create a large runner in the org, selecting windows arm

vidyasagarnimmagaddi commented 3 weeks ago

Hi @lilith ,Thank you for bringing this issue to us. We are looking into this issue and will update you on this issue after investigating.

lkfortuna commented 2 weeks ago

Hi there - right now the only option we have available for windows on arm is the base image, and you are correct that there are no tools installed on it. We have a windows image coming soon that will be provided by Arm, that will have tools installed. That image will be managed out of the partner-runner-images repository, as it will be a partner image.

lilith commented 2 weeks ago

This is not @ you, but at the powers that be that decided windows-arm support should be third-party, and feel free to quote me:

Hot take, but if Microsoft wants our free weekend labor to port tens of thousands of essential open-source packages to support Windows/ARM and avoid a repeated flop, they could put in a token effort themselves and perhaps not charge us for the privilege. This should not be a fake partner feature we're paying Github for. It should have launched before the Copilot+ marketing push.

Microsoft's buggy dev toolchains for ARM already take 10x more of our valuable time and effort, and without functional free CI, why is it worth our time? It's completely valid for maintainers to make a no-windows-arm support policy when the situation is this uniquely bad, and it's easy to spend more time keeping that platform supported than everything else combined. Mac support is easier and that's saying something, given their hostile T&C on the apple SDKs.