Isolation strings, should match user input #3033
Conversation
| @@ -959,7 +959,7 @@ func defaultIsolation() (define.Isolation, error) { | |||
| func IsolationOption(isolation string) (define.Isolation, error) { | |||
| if isolation != "" { | |||
| switch strings.ToLower(isolation) { | |||
| case "oci": | |||
| case "oci", "default": | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
based on your changes above, is "default" possible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder the same, but otherwise LGTM.
|
Lint isn't happy, perhaps due to the "default" check? The error is not very enlightening. |
rhatdan
force-pushed
the
isolation
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1bcf06d
to
d138064
Compare
When we parse isolation we expect users to input chroot, oci, rootless. So when we translate the constants back to strings, we should use the same values. These human names need to be passed over the podman-remote build bindings, so we need to make them match. Also docker describes an isolation of "default", which we should also handle for potential scripts. Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL |
|
/lgtm |
|
@jwhonce: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/lgtm |
my vote doesn't count :| .. oh well.. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval. This pull-request has been approved by: lsm5, rhatdan 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 |
When we parse isolation we expect users to input chroot, oci, rootless.
So when we translate the constants back to strings, we should use the
same values.
These human names need to be passed over the podman-remote build
bindings, so we need to make them match.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
How to verify it
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?