Fix cid based oifs #28
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Issues caught by Docker version 27.0.3, build 7d4bcd8. https://docs.docker.com/reference/build-checks/from-as-casing/ https://docs.docker.com/reference/build-checks/legacy-key-value-format/
'link-outer-dev normally creates a friendly name for the outer link device using a combination of service and device name; however, if that string is look long, the fallback strategy is to use a portion of the container id. Unfortunately the id key was removed during a refactoring, which introduced the regression.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR re-introduces the container id key, which was removed during a fix/refactoring before the 2.4.0 release. This id is used when naming outer link devices if the service+device name is too long, so we hit a missing
.substringerror for null when service names are long. conlink examples use terse names, so this case is never hit in GHA.Also clean up Dockerfile to comply with the buildx checks, and bump to 2.5.1.
Let's discuss (in comments or offline) how we want to approach testing specific cases that may be more of a distraction than benefit in human-targeted examples/docs. For instance, I could trigger this in GHA by renaming the r0 service in example 1 to router0, but that feels awkward and perhaps less standard/clear. I would also like to test the link merging functionality. Do we want an example that is intended to be "random knowedge for advanced users" where we can put a long list of random cases to test, or do we want to start a new set of tests specifically for integration testing?