Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 9, 2022. It is now read-only.

Update to latest hcsshim - 0.8.9 #1467

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dims
Copy link
Member

@dims dims commented Apr 29, 2020

Switch to ad tagged version of hcsshim. Context here:
kubernetes/kubernetes#87420 (comment)

Signed-off-by: Davanum Srinivas [email protected]

Signed-off-by: Davanum Srinivas <[email protected]>
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

Hi @dims. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a containerd member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

does that mean tags should be used again? (there was some confusion in microsoft/hcsshim#700, also what stability/compatibility guarantees the tags provided)

@dims
Copy link
Member Author

dims commented Apr 29, 2020

@thaJeztah yep, i believe so. the main problem was the recursive dependency which we worked through in microsoft/hcsshim#789 to split the cri-api dependencies into a separate go.mod file in the test/ directory

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

Ah, thanks!

oh, wow, it's vendoring itself (we were actually discussing that recently what would happen if you use vendoring in combination with a local path replace)

@mikebrow
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

Copy link
Member

@mikebrow mikebrow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looking good excited to be removing these dependency loops... However there is another dependency loop (logical). This dependency is one of the containerd/containerd dependencies. We typically like to move up to a new version of containerd/containerd and sync their dependency changes all at once.

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

This dependency is one of the containerd/containerd dependencies.

Good catch; yes, so it should be updated in containerd/containerd first, and then bumped here together with containerd/containerd (and other dependencies in containerd that were updated)

@dims
Copy link
Member Author

dims commented May 1, 2020

closing this. will fix containerd/containerd first

@dims dims closed this May 1, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants