-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
config: drop SetDefaultConfigFilePath($CONTAINERS_STORAGE_CONF) #2420
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
config: drop SetDefaultConfigFilePath($CONTAINERS_STORAGE_CONF) #2420
Conversation
the containers/storage setup code already looks for that, and forcefully setting it confuses storage setup in loadStoreOptionsFromConfFile. Closes: containers#2419 Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@redhat.com>
Reviewer's Guide by SourceryThis pull request removes the explicit setting of the default configuration file path using the No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation. File-Level Changes
Possibly linked issues
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
a90192a
to
f500908
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey @giuseppe - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:
Overall Comments:
- Consider adding a comment explaining why
SetDefaultConfigFilePath
was removed.
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
- 🟢 Documentation: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
overall seems logical, however there are quite a few podman test issues in containers/podman#25870.
Seems like it now requires the runroot to be set which then in turn means it could potentially break real users that use CONTAINERS_STORAGE_CONF. Is there a reason why c/storage requires runroot/graphroot to be set? IF we only want to change another field that should be valid, no?
if we use the default runroot, then we can risk to use a directory that is used with another graphroot (the default one) and have all the possible conflicts. Anyway, the fact that (another multi-repo fix and manual vendoring fun day) |
@Luap99 tests pass with the c/storage patch |
This LGTM. Should we wait for the c/s PR to merge first, vendor it in as part of this merge? |
yes, let's wait for that first and I'll revendor here |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: giuseppe, Luap99, sourcery-ai[bot] 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
(containers/storage#2318 has not been included in the c/storage version tag so this should not be merged until we have cut c/common here as well) |
/lgtm |
the containers/storage setup code already looks for that, and forcefully setting it confuses storage setup in
loadStoreOptionsFromConfFile.
Summary by Sourcery
Chores: