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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add privileged true to fix SELinux issues #105

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Add privileged true to fix SELinux issues #105

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

superseb
Copy link
Contributor

@superseb superseb commented Jan 3, 2020

@superseb superseb mentioned this pull request Jan 3, 2020
Closed
@superseb superseb requested a review from a team January 3, 2020 16:12
brendarearden
brendarearden previously approved these changes Jan 3, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@brendarearden brendarearden left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 🔥

kinarashah
kinarashah previously approved these changes Jan 3, 2020
View reviewed changes
@carloscarnero
Copy link

(bump)

@superseb
Add privileged true to fix SELinux issues
a0fc0a9 
Init containers for calico/canal would show permission denied error
@superseb
generate data
a302f62
@superseb superseb dismissed stale reviews from kinarashah and brendarearden via a302f62 February 6, 2020 12:24
@superseb
Copy link
Contributor Author

superseb commented Feb 6, 2020

rebased

brendarearden
brendarearden previously approved these changes Feb 6, 2020
View reviewed changes
@kinarashah
Copy link
Member

changes LGTM, but discussed with @superseb - we just need to decide if we want to make changes to current templates since it'd affect existing clusters

@deniseschannon
Copy link

@superseb @kinarashah what would happen with existing clusters?

@kinarashah
Copy link
Member

kinarashah commented Feb 7, 2020 •
edited
Loading

@superseb @kinarashah what would happen with existing clusters?

@deniseschannon I believe pods would get restarted, but also @superseb mentioned there wasn't any interruption and that he'd confirm once again

@superseb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Pods will get recreated, but connectivity will not be affected because there is no direct dependency on anything in the pod like a tunnel or something. Also the maxUnavailable is 1 so only one pod will be replaced at a time. However, due to the pods being recreated I would say to put it in 1.18 to not have any side effects on updating minor releases.

@deniseschannon deniseschannon dismissed brendarearden’s stale review February 13, 2020 23:02

The base branch was changed.

@deniseschannon deniseschannon changed the base branch from dev to dev-v2.4 February 13, 2020 23:02
@deniseschannon
Copy link

@superseb I'm assuming there is no way to introduce this into the latest templates for each k8s version?

@superseb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Superseded by #149

@superseb superseb closed this Feb 28, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@brendarearden brendarearden brendarearden left review comments

@kinarashah kinarashah Awaiting requested review from kinarashah

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@superseb @carloscarnero @kinarashah @deniseschannon @brendarearden