Conversation
|
Maybe I need more tea this morning, but this looks like the test should have passed. @edsantiago can you tell me where I'm mis-reading? |
|
@TomSweeneyRedHat I'm not sure what your question is? The test is poorly written, it's ambiguous in its failure message, but basically it expects line 2 to be "Using cache" and it is not. I don't know enough about this test or about layers to know what the problem is. sorry. |
|
So, to simplify the life of whoever debugs this, here is a good/bad diff: Left is good (expected output), right is bad (failure in this CI run). Basically, the failed run does "Trying to pull alpine". Again, I can't explain why, and leave it to smarter people to investigate. |
|
Thanks @edsantiago your answer is what I was looking for. I saw the "Using cache" in the output, and given that, thought the test |
|
Rebased to include #4837 |
Signed-off-by: Kir Kolyshkin <kolyshkin@gmail.com>
|
Rebased |
|
/approve |
|
@giuseppe @vrothberg PTAL |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: kolyshkin, rhatdan, vrothberg The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/lgtm |
|
Now we need to debate whether we bump the major version of Buildah. |
Assuming devicemapper has never been supported, we may win in court :^) |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
Remove device mapper support.
It seems that no one is using devicemapper storage driver nowadays, since overlayfs is so much better.
How to verify it
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Related to containers/storage#1619
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?