-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
Correct port range logic for port generation #8652
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 existing logic (Range > 0) always triggered, because range is guaranteed to be at least 1 (a single port has a range of 1, a two port range (e.g. 80-81) has a range of 2, and so on). As such this could cause ports that had a host port assigned to them by the user to randomly assign one instead. Fixes containers#8650 Fixes containers#8651 Signed-off-by: Matthew Heon <[email protected]>
Now also fixes #8651 |
@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL |
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
@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL |
nice work @mheon |
/hold |
/lgtm |
/hold cancel |
The existing logic (Range > 0) always triggered, because range is guaranteed to be at least 1 (a single port has a range of 1, a two port range (e.g. 80-81) has a range of 2, and so on). As such this could cause ports that had a host port assigned to them by the user to randomly assign one instead.
Fixes #8650