Sort CapDrop in inspect to guarantee order #9494
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mheon 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 |
|
The test here is a little bit iffy and will break if we drop additional caps from |
The order of CapAdd when inspecting containers is deterministic. However, the order of CapDrop is not (for unclear reasons). Add a quick sort on the final array to guarantee a consistent order. Fixes containers#9490 Signed-off-by: Matthew Heon <mheon@redhat.com>
| @@ -698,6 +699,8 @@ func (c *Container) generateInspectContainerHostConfig(ctrSpec *spec.Spec, named | |||
| for cap := range boundingCaps { | |||
| capDrop = append(capDrop, cap) | |||
| } | |||
| // Sort CapDrop so it displays in consistent order (GH #9490) | |||
| sort.Strings(capDrop) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have to do the same for capAdd?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CapAdd is already deterministic (it generates based on the OCI spec in the DB, which doesn't change; CapDrop generates off the list of default capabilities from the gocapability library, which seems to return caps in a nondeterministic order?).
|
/hold |
|
/hold cancel |
The order of CapAdd when inspecting containers is deterministic. However, the order of CapDrop is not (for unclear reasons). Add a quick sort on the final array to guarantee a consistent order.
Fixes #9490