Skip to content
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

Release v1.1.15 #4422

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: release-1.1
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Release v1.1.15 #4422

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

rata
Copy link
Member

@rata rata commented Oct 2, 2024

[1.1.15] - 2024-10-07

Fixed

Removed


I'd like to create a 1.1.15 release including the change to remove the bindfd logic (already backported :)), as that is causing us quite some pain. I'm of course fine if we release earlier than that date, in fact that would be great :)

I'll be on PTO starting today and coming back next week. Feel free to either push to this branch to amend any changes (maintainers can push to that branch on my behalf IIUC), otherwise I can address the changes early next week.

@rata rata force-pushed the release-1.1.15 branch 2 times, most recently from 8a768e6 to 28ccc03 Compare October 2, 2024 11:25
@rata
Copy link
Member Author

rata commented Oct 2, 2024

Hmm, alma linux 9 is failing with:

not ok 14 runc run (cgroup v2 resources.unified only)
# (in test file tests/integration/cgroups.bats, line 270)
#   `[ "$status" -eq 0 ]' failed
# runc spec (status=0):
#
# runc run -d --console-socket /tmp/bats-run-eiy40K/runc.G1EDSZ/tty/sock test_cgroups_unified (status=1):
# time="2024-10-02T11:30:45Z" level=error msg="runc run failed: unable to start container process: container init was OOM-killed (memory limit too low?)"

It failed also when merging to the 1.1 branch, but not on the PR. See the last commit "merge #4391 into opencontainers/runc:release-1.1": https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/commits/release-1.1/

@rata
Copy link
Member Author

rata commented Oct 2, 2024

Fixed here for 1.1: #4423

@kolyshkin kolyshkin added this to the 1.1.15 milestone Oct 3, 2024
@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

Let's include #4425 into 1.1.15, too.

Also, we need to decide what to do with #4347

@cyphar
Copy link
Member

cyphar commented Oct 4, 2024

Since #4347 is a longer-standing issue I don't think we need to block a 1.1.z patch release on it. Maybe we might want to block 1.2.0 on it (depending on how the spec stuff goes) but I'm not sure if we would even want to backport a spec fix to 1.1.z.

@AkihiroSuda
Copy link
Member

LGTM but needs rebase

No entry lives under this line, let's just remove it.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CHANGELOG.md Show resolved Hide resolved
[@kolyshkin: rebased; added a CVE link; added 1.1.15 link; changed date to 7 Oct]

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Kir Kolyshkin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

I rebased this PR and did some minor fixes to the changelog (added missing CVE and 1.1.15 links, fixed the "Unreleased 1.1.z" link).

Also changed the release date to Monday, because why not.

@lifubang
Copy link
Member

lifubang commented Oct 5, 2024

I searched PR with the label kind/bug, and found that #3546 is not only an new feature implementation, but also a bug in practise.
Do you think #3546 should be included?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants