Skip to content

Conversation

@Adarshkumar0509
Copy link

@Adarshkumar0509 Adarshkumar0509 commented Feb 2, 2026

This pull request updates .clusterfuzzlite/Dockerfile. It originally proposed using the gcr.io/oss-fuzz-base/base-builder-python:ubuntu-25-04 base image, but that tag is not yet available, so the Dockerfile has been reverted to the existing ubuntu-24-04 base image.

Changes:

  • Keep the existing ClusterFuzzLite base image ubuntu-24-04.
  • Leave the rest of the build and dependency installation steps unchanged.

Rationale:

Refs #2105

Related PR: #2115 (main Dockerfile Python upgrade).

@sydseter
Copy link
Collaborator

sydseter commented Feb 2, 2026

These needs to be done together: #2115

@sydseter
Copy link
Collaborator

sydseter commented Feb 2, 2026

As we aren’t installing Ubuntu 25.04, Puthon 3.13 need to be installed manually.

@sydseter
Copy link
Collaborator

sydseter commented Feb 3, 2026

‎.clusterfuzzlite/Dockerfile is still using Python 3.12. Python 3.13 need to be explicitly installed.

Install and use Python 3.13 in ClusterFuzzLite Dockerfile
I attempted to install Python 3.13 in .clusterfuzzlite/Dockerfile using apt and ppa:deadsnakes/ppa, but the OSS-Fuzz base image for ubuntu-24-04 does not provide python3.13 packages (CI failed with E: Unable to locate package python3.13). I’ve reverted that change so the ClusterFuzzLite build works as before.
I’m happy to update this Dockerfile again with a Python 3.13 installation method that matches your preferred approach for this project (e.g., compiling from source or following an existing OSS-Fuzz pattern). Please let me know how you’d like to handle Python 3.13 here.
@Adarshkumar0509
Copy link
Author

sir, I tried installing Python 3.13 in .clusterfuzzlite/Dockerfile using apt, but the OSS-Fuzz base image for ubuntu-24-04 doesn’t provide python3.13, so CI failed. I’ve reverted that change so this PR keeps the current working setup. Could you please suggest the best way to add Python 3.13 to the ClusterFuzzLite image (e.g., compiling from source or following an existing OSS-Fuzz pattern)? I’m happy to update the Dockerfile once I know your preferred approach.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants