You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As part of the target environment validation project, I try to validate that (componentised and resolved) Wasm components conform to one of the supported Spin worlds for their trigger. For example, a HTTP component should conform to fermyon:spin/[email protected] (
However, the fileserver 0.3 component (built with Spin SDK 2.x) does not conform to either of these worlds, because (again, once componentised) it exportswasi:http/[email protected] (which is available only in the fermyon:spin/[email protected] world), but importswasi:filesystem/[email protected] and other WASI 0.2 interfaces (which are only available in the fermyon:spin/[email protected] world). This is possibly an artefact of spin-componentize producing a hybrid, I am not sure.
Whatever the cause, the upshot is that attempting to validate the fileserver against either of the Spin HTTP worlds fails. If we implemented target validation using the current worlds, we would be telling people that the fileserver doesn't work. Which it does. Like a boss.
So, since this hybrid works, should the Spin world reflect that? That is, should the rc world import WASI 0.2 as well as WASI rc, and should the 'release' world import WASI rc as well as WASI 0.2?
Or is it correct that a component should fit entirely within one of these worlds, and this is merely a componentisation glitch with RC modules?
This certainly strikes me as a bug somewhere. The Spin runtime supports running both worlds which effectively means it can support the union of all imports from those two worlds. However, if another runtime wanted to run Spin applications but only wanted to support the fermyon:spin/[email protected] (a very reasonable thing to do), it would not be able to run this application.
I think ideally, we would perhaps warn in situations like this. The warning should state that the application can run, but that it's a compatibility hazard since the application may not run on other runtimes since it is not conforming to a known world.
As part of the target environment validation project, I try to validate that (componentised and resolved) Wasm components conform to one of the supported Spin worlds for their trigger. For example, a HTTP component should conform to
fermyon:spin/[email protected]
(spin/wit/world.wit
Line 4 in 3e62d2e
fermyon:spin/[email protected]
(spin/wit/world.wit
Line 10 in 3e62d2e
However, the fileserver 0.3 component (built with Spin SDK 2.x) does not conform to either of these worlds, because (again, once componentised) it exports
wasi:http/[email protected]
(which is available only in thefermyon:spin/[email protected]
world), but importswasi:filesystem/[email protected]
and other WASI 0.2 interfaces (which are only available in thefermyon:spin/[email protected]
world). This is possibly an artefact ofspin-componentize
producing a hybrid, I am not sure.Whatever the cause, the upshot is that attempting to validate the fileserver against either of the Spin HTTP worlds fails. If we implemented target validation using the current worlds, we would be telling people that the fileserver doesn't work. Which it does. Like a boss.
So, since this hybrid works, should the Spin world reflect that? That is, should the
rc
world import WASI 0.2 as well as WASI rc, and should the 'release' world import WASI rc as well as WASI 0.2?Or is it correct that a component should fit entirely within one of these worlds, and this is merely a componentisation glitch with RC modules?
Additional context
The fileserver world before componentisation:
This appears to conform to the
rc
world.The fileserver world after componentisation:
This appears to require imports from both worlds (which works, but does not conform to either WIT).
cc @tschneidereit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: