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
vendor: Bump cAdvisor to v0.45.0 #111647
vendor: Bump cAdvisor to v0.45.0 #111647
Conversation
@bobbypage: This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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 {
- "directDependencies": 229,
+ "directDependencies": 228,
- "transitiveDependencies": 261,
+ "transitiveDependencies": 262,
- "totalDependencies": 322,
+ "totalDependencies": 323,
"maxDepthOfDependencies": 30
} as a follow-up, might be worth adding containerd/containerd to our unwanted-dependencies.json file, and seeing if there's a way to avoid the gogo/googleapis transitive dep |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bobbypage, liggitt 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 |
/milestone v1.25 |
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest |
1 similar comment
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest |
@bobbypage looks like something changed underneath. please see the failure in pull-kubernetes-dependencies NOTE for release team: This one had all the approvals to merge, but one of the things that merged before this one must have caused a dependency failure. @bobbypage will respin this and we will land it hopefully today. |
looks like this needs a hack/update-vendor.sh to fix the presubmit |
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest |
Signed-off-by: David Porter <david@porter.me>
5a1a131
to
d9fda8a
Compare
Done, rebased and updated the missing dependency |
/lgtm |
Just wanted to cross-link google/cadvisor#3204 from this PR. It's causing us to have to fork cadvisor and revert the affected change as part of our v1.26.0 release. |
@brandond thanks for the feedback, linking to the slack thread you started too https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C0BP8PW9G/p1669844347437479 |
Signed-off-by: David Porter david@porter.me
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
This updates to the latest version of cAdvisor.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
cAdvisor diff - google/cadvisor@v0.44.1...v0.45.0
This version includes the containerd API vendored directly into cAdvisor as part of containerd/containerd#7231 (google/cadvisor#3145 by @dims) to ensure that k/k is not vendoring an EoL version of containerd.
Note: containerd is still listed as dependency in
go.mod
becausehcsshim
requires it.Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: