sandbox iface: don't fail if uid is not specified #3774
Conversation
|
/retest |
|
Maybe it's just me with a light load of tea, but your PR description doesn't match the code change... |
is that better? |
|
/test e2e_fedora |
|
/test e2e_features_fedora |
It is not strictly needed, just a namespace is Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <pehunt@redhat.com>
18a6050 to
de26231
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3774 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 40.26% 40.24% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 105 105
Lines 8678 8676 -2
==========================================
- Hits 3494 3492 -2
Misses 4873 4873
Partials 311 311 |
|
/retest |
|
LGTM |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: haircommander, saschagrunert 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 |
|
/cherry-pick release-1.18 |
|
@haircommander: failed to push cherry-picked changes in GitHub: pushing failed, output: "To https://github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o\n ! [remote rejected] cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 -> cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 (cannot lock ref 'refs/heads/cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18': reference already exists)\nerror: failed to push some refs to 'https://openshift-cherrypick-robot:CENSORED@github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o'\n", error: exit status 1 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
@haircommander: new pull request created: #3788 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
Title make more sense to my noggin now, thx. IDK so thought I'd ask and sorry I didn't ask before merge. Any value to changing the error to a Warning or a Debug statement instead of dropping it completely? |
|
/shrug I don't see a ton of value |
|
@haircommander: failed to push cherry-picked changes in GitHub: pushing failed, output: "To https://github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o\n ! [rejected] cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 -> cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 (non-fast-forward)\nerror: failed to push some refs to 'https://openshift-cherrypick-robot:CENSORED@github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o'\nhint: Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\nhint: its remote counterpart. Integrate the remote changes (e.g.\nhint: 'git pull ...') before pushing again.\nhint: See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.\n", error: exit status 1 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
1 similar comment
|
@haircommander: failed to push cherry-picked changes in GitHub: pushing failed, output: "To https://github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o\n ! [rejected] cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 -> cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 (non-fast-forward)\nerror: failed to push some refs to 'https://openshift-cherrypick-robot:CENSORED@github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o'\nhint: Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\nhint: its remote counterpart. Integrate the remote changes (e.g.\nhint: 'git pull ...') before pushing again.\nhint: See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.\n", error: exit status 1 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/kind bug |
|
@haircommander: failed to push cherry-picked changes in GitHub: pushing failed, output: "To https://github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o\n ! [rejected] cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 -> cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 (non-fast-forward)\nerror: failed to push some refs to 'https://openshift-cherrypick-robot:CENSORED@github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o'\nhint: Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\nhint: its remote counterpart. Integrate the remote changes (e.g.\nhint: 'git pull ...') before pushing again.\nhint: See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.\n", error: exit status 1 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
1 similar comment
|
@haircommander: failed to push cherry-picked changes in GitHub: pushing failed, output: "To https://github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o\n ! [rejected] cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 -> cherry-pick-3774-to-release-1.18 (non-fast-forward)\nerror: failed to push some refs to 'https://openshift-cherrypick-robot:CENSORED@github.com/openshift-cherrypick-robot/cri-o'\nhint: Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\nhint: its remote counterpart. Integrate the remote changes (e.g.\nhint: 'git pull ...') before pushing again.\nhint: See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.\n", error: exit status 1 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
before we started switching to have sandbox be in an interface, the only reason we fatally failed on run pod sandbox was if there was no Namespace. Uid did not need to be defined. I see no harm in continuing to do this.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
fixes #3618
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?