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
Update protobuf version #14831
Update protobuf version #14831
Conversation
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.
Thanks for your contribution. LGTM
Java 8 Integration test (module (alluxio.client.fs.,!alluxio.client.fs.concurrent.,!alluxio.client.fs.io.**)) reports no test failure but the following compilation error
|
The other 2 failed checks report the following test case failures:
All are in the sheet. |
compilation error is real error. @apc999 @madanadit can we fully remove integration/yarn or is there sb still using it? |
Can be removed
…On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 10:56 PM LuQQiu ***@***.***> wrote:
compilation error is real error. @apc999 <https://github.com/apc999>
@madanadit <https://github.com/madanadit> can we fully remove
integration/yarn or is there sb still using it?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#14831 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARILORRRYO5AMZEPRVD4E3UVUQZTANCNFSM5LVYCXBA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
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.
LGTM
@ddadaal could you create a PR to remove integration/yarn |
@yuzhu is this one good for checkin so far? |
FileOutStreamIntegrationTest.cancelWrite:248 expected:<0> but was:<1000> known test error |
alluxio-bot, merge this please |
### What changes are proposed in this pull request? Remove integration/yarn as requested in #14831 (comment) ### Why are the changes needed? integration/yarn is not needed but introduces several vulnerabilities. ### Does this PR introduce any user facing changes? No. pr-link: #14860 change-id: cid-b45432272a8cfa7509ab39e75975d5c960eb230a
What changes are proposed in this pull request?
Try updating protobuf to resolve some CVEs.
Why are the changes needed?
Some CVEs are caused by protobuf version. This PR updates protobuf to a fixed version.
Does this PR introduce any user facing changes?
No