-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 774
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
conformance: add a test that tries to chowning a volume #5492
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: nalind 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 |
Ephemeral COPR build failed. @containers/packit-build please check. |
622f5c9
to
03ed726
Compare
dd99371
to
6f8e704
Compare
Add a conformance test that attempts to "chown" a volume declared in a base image, which produces different results depending on whether we're using the BuildKit-based builder or the V1 "classic" builder. For now, don't try to change our behavior, and continue imitating the behavior of the classic builder. Signed-off-by: Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin@redhat.com>
When we get a tried-to-write-to-closed-pipe error while encoding something for a coprocess, try to capture error output from the coprocess and add it to the error message, to hopefully catch a flake we're seeing in CI. Signed-off-by: Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin@redhat.com>
PR needs rebase. 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-sigs/prow repository. |
I think this is going to get replaced as part of making the volume handling a run-time option. |
Obsoleted by #5604, closing. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind other
What this PR does / why we need it:
Add a conformance test that attempts to "chown" a volume declared in a base image, which produces different results depending on whether we're using the BuildKit-based builder or the V1 "classic" builder. For now, don't try to change our behavior, and continue imitating the behavior of the classic builder.
How to verify it
New conformance test!
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
None
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?