add ca-certificates: for accessing remote raster files;

[ImreSamu]

fix: https://github.com/postgis/docker-postgis/issues/307

important changes:

• Dockerfile.template
• Dockerfile.alpine.template
• Dockerfile.master.template

based on my local test; minimal disk space increase is expected ( < 1MB )

# debian
new_postgis                                       14-3.2               77ce6bebee3d   20 seconds ago   575MB
postgis/postgis                                   14-3.2               9791b51b1ff7   4 days ago       575MB

# alpine
new_postgis                                       14-3.2-alpine        c18a9d1d4d26   3 minutes ago    395MB
postgis/postgis                                   14-3.2-alpine        128949707ecd   4 days ago       395MB

# master  - not tested .. disk space is less important.

disclaimer: remote raster file access not tested;

IMHO: if the CI/CD is OK then ready to review/merge.

[ImreSamu]

maybe i'm missing it, but in the master tenmplates it seems in cases where the ca-certificates package is not found to be installed, there's no explicit installation. I'm not understanding the reason for the removal of the explicit ca-certificates package from the master templates.

this is the "original" Dockerifle.master.templete ... ( search for 'ca-certificates' )

• https://github.com/postgis/docker-postgis/blob/a6a9f021e243c0b6f908cf8ad8d0ae5460dcb1b1/Dockerfile.master.template

this is the proposed "new" Dockerfile.master.template:

• https://github.com/postgis/docker-postgis/blob/468b99d9c101eecd00ac2058230ee0f6d68a1330/Dockerfile.master.template

And the 'ca-certificates' is installed in both of the "stage" ( we are using "multi-stage builds" )

• stage1: installed in L40 ( line 40 )
• stage2: installed in L243
• stage2: uninstalled in L303
  • I have removed this line from the new temple ... so we are keeping it.

in my proposal:
I have

• removed the "stage2" uninstall ( L303 in the original template )
• and added an "extra comment warning" + "extra package test"
  • .. for avoiding any non-perfect future refactoring.

[phillipross]

oops, I see now. I was definitely reading incorrectly 😅 looks good and thanks for the clarifications!