Skip to content

Conversation

aaronlehmann
Copy link
Contributor

This version includes a fix that avoids checking against specific HTTP
status codes. The previous behavior violated the registry API spec.

Fixes #14975

Signed-off-by: Aaron Lehmann aaron.lehmann@docker.com

This version includes a fix that avoids checking against specific HTTP
status codes. The previous behavior violated the registry API spec.

Fixes moby#14975

Signed-off-by: Aaron Lehmann <aaron.lehmann@docker.com>
@dmp42
Copy link
Contributor

dmp42 commented Jul 27, 2015

cc @docker/distribution-maintainers

@calavera
Copy link
Contributor

The previous behavior violated the registry API spec.

This sounds reasonable to add to 1.8 but it looks like we're also adding some new logic in that Clear function. Is that necessary for the release?

@aaronlehmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

As far as I know, it's not necessary. It's there because I'm updating distribution to the latest master. It would be possible to branch from the earlier revision and apply only the HTTP status code change, if that's something we want to consider.

@dmcgowan
Copy link
Member

It is not necessary, the client does not currently call Delete so the new logic should not be on any other call path.

@aaronlehmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Does anyone know why the tests are failing? I see failures like the following which don't have an obvious connection to updating the dependency:

FAIL: docker_cli_run_test.go:1325: DockerSuite.TestRunCopyVolumeUidGid

docker_cli_run_test.go:1341:
   c.Fatalf("Wrong /hello ownership: %s, expected dockerio:dockerio", out)
... Error: Wrong /hello ownership: 2015/07/25 04:16:19 error generating version 4 uuid, retrying: open /dev/urandom: operation not permitted
dockerio:dockerio, expected dockerio:dockerio

@dmcgowan
Copy link
Member

This error occurs when the UUID library is unable to get enough random bits due to entropy exhaustion open /dev/urandom: operation not permitted

@dmp42
Copy link
Contributor

dmp42 commented Jul 27, 2015

@calavera IIRC this is a code path that the engine does not use (for the registry soft-delete feature), but I'll let @RichardScothern & @aaronlehmann confirm that this indeed has no effect.

@icecrime
Copy link
Contributor

Our CI is gone fishing. Otherwise LGTM!

@icecrime
Copy link
Contributor

Waiting from green tests.

@jessfraz
Copy link
Contributor

failed on /dev/urandom... le sighhhh, but merging

jessfraz pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2015
Update vendored distribution repo to new version
@jessfraz jessfraz merged commit f32cab8 into moby:master Jul 28, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Registry Client response code acceptance is too narrow
7 participants