Improve error message when CLI wrapper Exec fails #7373
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Brad Davidson <[email protected]>
brandond
force-pushed
the
better-exec-log
branch
from
999cd3b to
47f710a
Compare
cwayne18
approved these changes
Apr 28, 2023
osodracnai
approved these changes
Apr 28, 2023
This was referenced May 10, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proposed Changes
Improve error message when CLI wrapper Exec fails
Right now if the k3s CLI wrapper fails to exec the extracted binaries (most frequently because /var is mounted noxec), it just prints a fairly hard to diagnose
FATA [0000] permission deniederror.This wraps the exec error in some context showing what it was trying to exec, to assist with troubleshooting.
Perhaps we could also check to see if the filesystem is mounted noexec and return an even more meaningful error, but there doesn't seem to be a particularly graceful way to do that.
Types of Changes
bugfix
Verification
See linked issue
Testing
Linked Issues
User-Facing Change
Further Comments