v4.4.1-rhel backports #20906

lsm5 · 2023-12-05T04:33:20Z

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

None

Related: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-16395

lsm5 · 2023-12-05T04:35:44Z

@TomSweeneyRedHat @edsantiago PTAL

lsm5 · 2023-12-05T12:29:39Z

@edsantiago any idea whatsup with bud remote fedora-37 root host ?

edsantiago · 2023-12-05T12:57:34Z

I have no idea. It reproduces 100% on my laptop. Probably something that needs to be wired into the podman-remote side. @flouthoc this is your code (from over a year ago), any idea why dockerignore 6 fails under podman-remote?

If you need to skip it, here's how:

diff --git a/test/buildah-bud/apply-podman-deltas b/test/buildah-bud/apply-podman-deltas
index 4c4ab17af..c8bdbcf38 100755
--- a/test/buildah-bud/apply-podman-deltas
+++ b/test/buildah-bud/apply-podman-deltas
@@ -248,3 +248,4 @@ skip_if_remote "different error messages between podman & podman-remote" \
                "bud with .dockerignore #2" \
-               "bud with .dockerignore #4"
+               "bud with .dockerignore #4" \
+               "bud with .dockerignore #6"

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2023-12-06T00:34:00Z

LGTM
once the test hiccup is traced down.
@lsm5 can you add a URL to the jira card this addresses please? Either as a new comment, or preferably in the description.

lsm5 · 2023-12-11T13:56:06Z

LGTM once the test hiccup is traced down. @lsm5 can you add a URL to the jira card this addresses please? Either as a new comment, or preferably in the description.

added in description.

flouthoc · 2023-12-11T14:24:06Z

@edsantiago I'll check it and report back on this PR. I'm unable to quickly recall so I'll have to go again through this.

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2023-12-13T23:31:45Z

Addresses: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-13468 and
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-16395

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-02-22T21:57:51Z

@lsm5 can you push this one along please?

Drop support for remote use-cases when `.containerignore` or `.dockerignore` is a symlink pointing to arbitrary location on host. Signed-off-by: Aditya R <[email protected]>

lsm5 · 2024-03-15T12:32:50Z

@edsantiago @cevich can you take another look at the failures please? Would this be better off with getting rid of f36 and replacing f37 with f38 ?

cevich · 2024-03-15T16:54:58Z

Changing the CI environment on a release branch breaks the reason we have CI on release branches 😉 Though it's not unprecedented to remove/disable some tests if they're no-longer maintainable or broken due to some externality. Looking at failures...

cevich · 2024-03-15T17:04:11Z

...what I see:

The aarch64 machine test seems like a flake. I restarted it.
The quay.io/libpod/testimage ref is wrong, there is no latest. There is a 20240123 tag
which I was just able to pull successfully.
Error: initializing source docker://quay.io/libpod/testimage@sha256:c78...911: can't talk to a V1 container registry seems like a quay flake? I can pull that image+sha just fine.

I see many of these failures haven't been retried. I'll restart the ones that seem like flakes to me. Hopefully that will help.

edsantiago · 2024-03-19T20:18:06Z

test/buildah-bud/apply-podman-deltas

@@ -245,7 +245,8 @@ skip_if_remote "Explicit request in buildah PR 4190 to skip this on remote" \
 # BEGIN tests which are skipped due to actual podman or podman-remote bugs.

 skip_if_remote "different error messages between podman & podman-remote" \
-               "bud with .dockerignore #2"
+               "bud with .dockerignore #2" \
+               "bud with .dockerignore #4"


The bud test seems to be a hard failure. I would just add one more line here, "bud with .dockerignore #6"

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-04-04T20:24:50Z

@lsm5 in all of your copious spare time, can you take a look at moving this one along again please?

lsm5 · 2024-04-15T18:28:00Z

looks like new failures:

Failed tests (2):
 - 234 podman export, alter tarball, re-import
 - 365 podman system df --format json functionality

and a machine test fail that I have retriggered just now.

edsantiago · 2024-04-15T18:34:22Z

test/system/helpers.bash

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ QUADLET=${QUADLET:-quadlet}
 PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_REGISTRY=${PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_REGISTRY:-"quay.io"}
 PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_USER=${PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_USER:-"libpod"}
 PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_NAME=${PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_NAME:-"testimage"}
-PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_TAG=${PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_TAG:-"20221018"}
+PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_TAG=${PODMAN_TEST_IMAGE_TAG:-"20240123"}


This is the cause of the system-test failures. Why are you bumping this? If there is no compelling reason, please just revert.

@cevich commented at #20906 (comment) . Did I bump in the wrong place?

I see the comment but not what it refers to. Is there any way to get more context? If not or if it's too hard, I suggest simply reverting that change, i.e. going back to 20221018

Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <[email protected]>

lsm5 · 2024-04-16T12:40:35Z

@edsantiago alright, only 1 job to go with 1 fail and 1 flake. could you PTAL?

edsantiago · 2024-04-16T12:51:35Z

In [containerized[(https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/6222347462508544/html/int-podman-fedora-37-root-container.log.html#t--podman-Netavark-network-works-across-user-ns--1):

# podman [options] run --log-driver k8s-file --rm --net 913c5fb620 --uidmap 0:1:4096 quay.io/libpod/alpine:latest sh -c echo podman | nc -w 1 nc-server.dns.podman 9480
nc: bad address 'nc-server.dns.podman'

I do not see anything in this PR that could possibly cause that failure. I've hit rerun and am crossing fingers.

edsantiago · 2024-04-16T12:55:39Z

test/e2e/build_test.go

@@ -456,6 +456,33 @@ RUN find /test`, ALPINE)
 		Expect(session.OutputToString()).To(ContainSubstring("/test/dummy"))
 	})

+	It("podman remote build must not allow symlink for ignore files", func() {


By a curious coincidence, I've spent the morning working on this very test. As written, this test is completely useless. If for any reason you need to repush, like to disable the failing containerized test, you might want to cherrypick #20582

It seems certain test infrastructure prevents cloning repo which contains symlink outside of the repo itself, generate symlink for such test by the testsuite itself just before running test and remove it when test is completed. Signed-off-by: Aditya R <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 607aff5) Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <[email protected]>

edsantiago

Tests are green! LGTM but I can't review this entire PR

openshift-ci · 2024-04-16T15:19:15Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: edsantiago, lsm5

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [edsantiago,lsm5]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

lsm5 · 2024-04-16T15:46:49Z

@edsantiago @TomSweeneyRedHat @cevich good to go. Thanks all

lsm5 · 2024-04-16T15:48:35Z

Tests are green! LGTM but I can't review this entire PR

ah I see your comment. Given these are backports and tests are green maybe it's safe (enough) to merge

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-04-16T17:56:40Z

LGTM
@mheon PTAL and merge if it LGTY

mheon · 2024-04-16T18:02:27Z

/lgtm

openshift-ci bot added release-note-none approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Dec 5, 2023

github-actions bot added the kind/api-change Change to remote API; merits scrutiny label Dec 5, 2023

lsm5 mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2023

[v4.4.1-rhel] remote,build: ignore if .containerignore or .dockerignore is a symlink outside of buildContext #20901

Closed

edsantiago mentioned this pull request Dec 13, 2023

[v4.4.1-rhel] remote,build: error if containerignore is symlink #20991

Closed

lsm5 force-pushed the v4.4.1-rhel-fr branch from fcf1615 to 4bc2373 Compare February 6, 2024 11:29

remote,build: error if containerignore is symlink

284c44d

Drop support for remote use-cases when `.containerignore` or `.dockerignore` is a symlink pointing to arbitrary location on host. Signed-off-by: Aditya R <[email protected]>

lsm5 force-pushed the v4.4.1-rhel-fr branch from 4bc2373 to 284c44d Compare March 13, 2024 14:32

edsantiago reviewed Mar 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

lsm5 force-pushed the v4.4.1-rhel-fr branch from 9dbbddf to 190a9ed Compare April 15, 2024 12:33

edsantiago reviewed Apr 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

CI fixes from Chris Evich and Ed Santiago

a74493f

Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <[email protected]>

lsm5 force-pushed the v4.4.1-rhel-fr branch from 190a9ed to a74493f Compare April 15, 2024 18:51

edsantiago reviewed Apr 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

edsantiago approved these changes Apr 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned mheon Apr 16, 2024

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 16, 2024

openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 661113d into containers:v4.4.1-rhel Apr 16, 2024
54 checks passed

lsm5 deleted the v4.4.1-rhel-fr branch April 17, 2024 12:35

stale-locking-app bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Jul 17, 2024

stale-locking-app bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 17, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

v4.4.1-rhel backports #20906

v4.4.1-rhel backports #20906

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023

edsantiago commented Dec 5, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Dec 6, 2023

lsm5 commented Dec 11, 2023

flouthoc commented Dec 11, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Dec 13, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Feb 22, 2024

lsm5 commented Mar 15, 2024

cevich commented Mar 15, 2024

cevich commented Mar 15, 2024

edsantiago Mar 19, 2024

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Apr 4, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 15, 2024

edsantiago Apr 15, 2024

lsm5 Apr 15, 2024

edsantiago Apr 15, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

edsantiago commented Apr 16, 2024

edsantiago Apr 16, 2024

edsantiago left a comment

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 16, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Apr 16, 2024

mheon commented Apr 16, 2024

v4.4.1-rhel backports #20906

v4.4.1-rhel backports #20906

Conversation

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023 • edited Loading

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023

edsantiago commented Dec 5, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Dec 6, 2023

lsm5 commented Dec 11, 2023

flouthoc commented Dec 11, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Dec 13, 2023

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Feb 22, 2024

lsm5 commented Mar 15, 2024

cevich commented Mar 15, 2024

cevich commented Mar 15, 2024

edsantiago Mar 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Apr 4, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 15, 2024

edsantiago Apr 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lsm5 Apr 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

edsantiago Apr 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

edsantiago commented Apr 16, 2024

edsantiago Apr 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 16, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

lsm5 commented Apr 16, 2024

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Apr 16, 2024

mheon commented Apr 16, 2024

lsm5 commented Dec 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading