many: container validation improvements#13682
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #13682 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 78.87% 78.90% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 1039 1040 +1
Lines 133603 133966 +363
==========================================
+ Hits 105381 105704 +323
- Misses 21637 21665 +28
- Partials 6585 6597 +12
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
LGTM! |
zyga
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't read test code but I have some comments on the evaluation details. Have a look please.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This limit should be documented somewhere. It would be good if there was a matching kernel-side limit so that our limit is not surprising to people.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe use the long form of for here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is somewhat costly for what is requested. Is this somehow different than strings.HasPrefix or am I missing something subtle?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this strings.HasPrefix again?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you clarify what is innocent here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would add a context here, like "Cannot evaluate and validate symbolic link: %s"
7be84b7 to
358ca95
Compare
Signed-off-by: Zeyad Gouda <zeyad.gouda@canonical.com>
358ca95 to
fb95190
Compare
No description provided.