-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
test/system: two small fixes #27233
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
test/system: two small fixes #27233
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Luap99 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 |
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.
I have one question about a possibly missed quote; otherwise, LGTM.
The CI is failing due to what looks like an unrelated linter issue. I think rebasing this PR on the latest main might solve it; otherwise, I'm not sure how to proceed.
I am fully rebased, it is main that got broken due parallel merge of indirectly conflicting PRs #27126 (unused linter) and #27169 (quadlet template fix). So someone must submit a PR with the linter fix that must get merged first then all other PRs must rebase to get unblocked. |
I created a PR with a fix for the linter: #27234 |
Bash will expand a signle ? to a file name which consists of a single char, and thus if you have a file named "a" in the cwd it will add a as argument which causes podman a ... to be executed which clearly fails the test. Signed-off-by: Paul Holzinger <[email protected]>
podman wait by default waits for exit not removal as the man page documents. Fixes: 3a98b6d ("test: Wait for killed container to avoid leak") Signed-off-by: Paul Holzinger <[email protected]>
LGTM |
Thanks for fixing this! |
Verification run for |
LGTM, CI is happy |
/LGTM |
Follow up to #27230
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?