Skip to content
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

system tests: use CONTAINERS_CONF_OVERRIDE #17951

Merged

Conversation

edsantiago
Copy link
Member

...not CONTAINERS_CONF. At least for most tests.

Nearly every system test currently using CONTAINERS_CONF=tmpfile
should be using CONTAINERS_CONF_OVERRIDE.

Simple reason: runtime (crun/runc), database_backend (bolt/sqlite),
logger, and other important settings from /etc/c.conf are not
usually written into the tmpfile. Those tests, therefore, are
not running podman as configured on the system.

Much more discussion: #15413

This PR is a prerequisite for enabling sqlite system tests. For
the sake of simplicity and sanity, I choose to submit the sqlite
switch as a separate PR once this passes and merges.

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago santiago@redhat.com

None

...not CONTAINERS_CONF. At least for most tests.

Nearly every system test currently using CONTAINERS_CONF=tmpfile
should be using CONTAINERS_CONF_OVERRIDE.

Simple reason: runtime (crun/runc), database_backend (bolt/sqlite),
logger, and other important settings from /etc/c.conf are not
usually written into the tmpfile. Those tests, therefore, are
not running podman as configured on the system.

Much more discussion: containers#15413

This PR is a prerequisite for enabling sqlite system tests. For
the sake of simplicity and sanity, I choose to submit the sqlite
switch as a separate PR once this passes and merges.

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <santiago@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added release-note-none approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Mar 27, 2023
@TomSweeneyRedHat
Copy link
Member

LGTM
The "fedora-37-aarch64 root host boltdb" failed in a way that I've never seen before. I don't think it's related to this change.

@edsantiago
Copy link
Member Author

No, that was yet another of our regular network flakes. This PR is pretty unlikely to cause any failures other than flakes. And, CI is now green.

Copy link
Member

@vrothberg vrothberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 28, 2023
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 28, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

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

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,vrothberg]

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 2cfb6e1 into containers:main Mar 28, 2023
@edsantiago edsantiago deleted the containers_conf_override branch March 28, 2023 10:47
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 4, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 4, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. release-note-none
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants