jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
What happened: When using a yaml file for input, silently fails at the first missing resource, not returning any further results. What you expected to happen: Searching with cli arguments properly ignores missing resources and continues the query, eg: Would expect similar results with a file input, eg: How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): With an input file of : the command fails at apparently the first missing resource: Note: that rearranging the inputs in (so that the missing resource is last) produces the "expected" output: Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ):Cloud provider or hardware configuration: local OS (e.g: ): fedora 30 Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others: x-ref:
/sig cli
/assign
Got around to reproducing it and can confirm that I'm getting the same behavior. I'm looking into fixing it now
thanks, any updates on this?
I've learned that in the case of a fake entry, kubectl stops sending API get requests altogether. Learned by running kubectl get -f --ignore-not-found --v=10, the result is shown below. Till now I've been looking into the cobra command framework but now I'm trying to find out where kubectl is making these API calls from(working on finding out where this connection is happening from Slack+debugging, I've asked a more detailed question here ). <img width="1440" alt="Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 4 13 41 PM" src="https://user-"
that's an interesting find, definitely helpful. When I looked into this I got to the section of get's main run function, and it seems like it should be continuing on any errors (see ) but maybe the ResourceBuilder is actually stopping when it hits a 404?
This behavior comes from where the not found errors are being ignored and where the input list is flattened. Errors are ignored here: While flattening occurs here: As the visitor iterates through the objects in the list if an error occurs, such as not found, it will stop iterating over the objects in the list and return that not found error. The logic will then ignore it and continue. Any objects that came before the not found object in the list will have been visited and will then be included in the output. To make the behavior consistent between the two ways of getting the set of objects, the would need to be updated to support filtering errors.
Just submitted a PR adding that functionality to the FlattenListVisitor. The behavior is now consistent between the two methods.

Related discussion:
text: if info.Mapping != nil && !info.Mapping.GroupVersionKind.Empty() { preferredGVKs = append(preferredGVKs, info.Mapping.GroupVersionKind) } <ins> errs := []error{} </ins> for i := range items { item, err := v.mapper.infoForObject(items[i], v.typer, preferredGVKs) if err != nil { <del> return err </del> <ins> errs = append(errs, err) continue </ins> } if len(info.ResourceVersion) != 0 { item.ResourceVersion = info.ResourceVersion } if err := fn(item, nil); err != nil { <del> return err </del> <ins> errs = append(errs, err) </ins> } } <del> return nil </del> <ins> return utilerrors.NewAggregate(errs) </ins> }) }
Code change:
What happened: When using a yaml file for input, silently fails at the first missing resource, not returning any further results. What you expected to happen: Searching with cli arguments properly ignores missing resources and continues the query, eg: Would expect similar results with a file input, eg: How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): With an input file of : the command fails at apparently the first missing resource: Note: that rearranging the inputs in (so that the missing resource is last) produces the "expected" output: Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ):Cloud provider or hardware configuration: local OS (e.g: ): fedora 30 Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others: x-ref:
/sig cli
/assign
Got around to reproducing it and can confirm that I'm getting the same behavior. I'm looking into fixing it now
thanks, any updates on this?
I've learned that in the case of a fake entry, kubectl stops sending API get requests altogether. Learned by running kubectl get -f --ignore-not-found --v=10, the result is shown below. Till now I've been looking into the cobra command framework but now I'm trying to find out where kubectl is making these API calls from(working on finding out where this connection is happening from Slack+debugging, I've asked a more detailed question here ). <img width="1440" alt="Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 4 13 41 PM" src="https://user-"
that's an interesting find, definitely helpful. When I looked into this I got to the section of get's main run function, and it seems like it should be continuing on any errors (see ) but maybe the ResourceBuilder is actually stopping when it hits a 404?
This behavior comes from where the not found errors are being ignored and where the input list is flattened. Errors are ignored here: While flattening occurs here: As the visitor iterates through the objects in the list if an error occurs, such as not found, it will stop iterating over the objects in the list and return that not found error. The logic will then ignore it and continue. Any objects that came before the not found object in the list will have been visited and will then be included in the output. To make the behavior consistent between the two ways of getting the set of objects, the would need to be updated to support filtering errors.
Just submitted a PR adding that functionality to the FlattenListVisitor. The behavior is now consistent between the two methods.

Related discussion:
text: import ( "bytes" <ins> "errors" </ins> "fmt" "io" "io/ioutil" <ins> "strings" </ins> "testing" "time"
Code change:
What happened: When using a yaml file for input, silently fails at the first missing resource, not returning any further results. What you expected to happen: Searching with cli arguments properly ignores missing resources and continues the query, eg: Would expect similar results with a file input, eg: How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): With an input file of : the command fails at apparently the first missing resource: Note: that rearranging the inputs in (so that the missing resource is last) produces the "expected" output: Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ):Cloud provider or hardware configuration: local OS (e.g: ): fedora 30 Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others: x-ref:
/sig cli
/assign
Got around to reproducing it and can confirm that I'm getting the same behavior. I'm looking into fixing it now
thanks, any updates on this?
I've learned that in the case of a fake entry, kubectl stops sending API get requests altogether. Learned by running kubectl get -f --ignore-not-found --v=10, the result is shown below. Till now I've been looking into the cobra command framework but now I'm trying to find out where kubectl is making these API calls from(working on finding out where this connection is happening from Slack+debugging, I've asked a more detailed question here ). <img width="1440" alt="Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 4 13 41 PM" src="https://user-"
that's an interesting find, definitely helpful. When I looked into this I got to the section of get's main run function, and it seems like it should be continuing on any errors (see ) but maybe the ResourceBuilder is actually stopping when it hits a 404?
This behavior comes from where the not found errors are being ignored and where the input list is flattened. Errors are ignored here: While flattening occurs here: As the visitor iterates through the objects in the list if an error occurs, such as not found, it will stop iterating over the objects in the list and return that not found error. The logic will then ignore it and continue. Any objects that came before the not found object in the list will have been visited and will then be included in the output. To make the behavior consistent between the two ways of getting the set of objects, the would need to be updated to support filtering errors.
Just submitted a PR adding that functionality to the FlattenListVisitor. The behavior is now consistent between the two methods.

Related discussion:
text: t.Fatal(spew.Sdump(test.Infos)) } } <ins> func TestFlattenListVisitorWithVisitorError(t *testing.T) { b := newDefaultBuilder(). FilenameParam(false, &FilenameOptions{Recursive: false, Filenames: []string{"../../artifacts/deeply-nested.yaml"}}). Flatten() test := &testVisitor{InjectErr: errors.New("visitor error")} err := b.Do().Visit(test.Handle) if err == nil || !strings.Contains(err.Error(), "visitor error") { t.Fatal(err) } if len(test.Infos) != 6 { t.Fatal(spew.Sdump(test.Infos)) } } </ins>
Code change:
[x] write e2e tests for all admission operations [x] (for resource APIs) [x] (for discovery docs) [x] switch to v1 admission APIs in e2e - [x] remove skips/time.Sleeps - and promote to conformance tests - AdmissionWebhook should have tests for all stable operations. Those tests should go through the conformance process before being released. This ticket is to help track what operations are yet to be covered by conformance tests. These stable endpoints should be hit by e2e tests tagged with [conformance]. There are tests currently hitting 6 of the corresponding beta endpoints that could be updated to use stable. Tests should be written to exercise the remaining 9 untested stable endpoints as well. These twelve tests could be updated to use the stable API, and subsequently promoted to conformance. / ! ! These will need tests written for them.  untested beta/admissionregistration !
/sig api-machinery
/assign
/area conformance
/assign ^ This is a requirement for graduation to GA.
can we get another apisnoop run? We've coverage for admissionregistration and apiextensions and I'd like to get confirmation from apisnoop that we've got full coverage now.
Keeping this open until tests are actually promoted to conformance
is ready for review. It adds our admission e2e tests to conformance as part of graduation to GA.
is updated currently not hit by any tests, one will need to be updated or written to cover it. Might want to ensure you've promoted one test that hit's each endpoint. !
The PR to do that is at

Related discussion:
text: "//staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest:go_default_library", "//staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/util/cert:go_default_library", "//staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/util/keyutil:go_default_library", <ins> "//staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/util/retry:go_default_library", </ins> "//staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/util/workqueue:go_default_library", "//staging/src/k8s.io/kube-aggregator/pkg/apis/apiregistration/v1:go_default_library", "//staging/src/k8s.io/kube-aggregator/pkg/client/clientset_generated/clientset:go_default_library",
Code change:
[x] write e2e tests for all admission operations [x] (for resource APIs) [x] (for discovery docs) [x] switch to v1 admission APIs in e2e - [x] remove skips/time.Sleeps - and promote to conformance tests - AdmissionWebhook should have tests for all stable operations. Those tests should go through the conformance process before being released. This ticket is to help track what operations are yet to be covered by conformance tests. These stable endpoints should be hit by e2e tests tagged with [conformance]. There are tests currently hitting 6 of the corresponding beta endpoints that could be updated to use stable. Tests should be written to exercise the remaining 9 untested stable endpoints as well. These twelve tests could be updated to use the stable API, and subsequently promoted to conformance. / ! ! These will need tests written for them.  untested beta/admissionregistration !
/sig api-machinery
/assign
/area conformance
/assign ^ This is a requirement for graduation to GA.
can we get another apisnoop run? We've coverage for admissionregistration and apiextensions and I'd like to get confirmation from apisnoop that we've got full coverage now.
Keeping this open until tests are actually promoted to conformance
is ready for review. It adds our admission e2e tests to conformance as part of graduation to GA.
is updated currently not hit by any tests, one will need to be updated or written to cover it. Might want to ensure you've promoted one test that hit's each endpoint. !
The PR to do that is at

Related discussion:
text: "strings" "time" <ins> "k8s.io/utils/pointer" </ins> admissionregistrationv1 "k8s.io/api/admissionregistration/v1" appsv1 "k8s.io/api/apps/v1" v1 "k8s.io/api/core/v1"
Code change:
[x] write e2e tests for all admission operations [x] (for resource APIs) [x] (for discovery docs) [x] switch to v1 admission APIs in e2e - [x] remove skips/time.Sleeps - and promote to conformance tests - AdmissionWebhook should have tests for all stable operations. Those tests should go through the conformance process before being released. This ticket is to help track what operations are yet to be covered by conformance tests. These stable endpoints should be hit by e2e tests tagged with [conformance]. There are tests currently hitting 6 of the corresponding beta endpoints that could be updated to use stable. Tests should be written to exercise the remaining 9 untested stable endpoints as well. These twelve tests could be updated to use the stable API, and subsequently promoted to conformance. / ! ! These will need tests written for them.  untested beta/admissionregistration !
/sig api-machinery
/assign
/area conformance
/assign ^ This is a requirement for graduation to GA.
can we get another apisnoop run? We've coverage for admissionregistration and apiextensions and I'd like to get confirmation from apisnoop that we've got full coverage now.
Keeping this open until tests are actually promoted to conformance
is ready for review. It adds our admission e2e tests to conformance as part of graduation to GA.
is updated currently not hit by any tests, one will need to be updated or written to cover it. Might want to ensure you've promoted one test that hit's each endpoint. !
The PR to do that is at

Related discussion:
text: "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1/unstructured" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/types" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/intstr" <ins> "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/uuid" </ins> utilversion "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/version" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/wait" "k8s.io/client-go/dynamic" clientset "k8s.io/client-go/kubernetes" <ins> "k8s.io/client-go/util/retry" </ins> "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/e2e/framework" e2edeploy "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/e2e/framework/deployment" e2elog "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/e2e/framework/log" e2epod "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/e2e/framework/pod" "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/utils/crd" imageutils "k8s.io/kubernetes/test/utils/image" <del> "k8s.io/utils/pointer" </del> "github.com/onsi/ginkgo" "github.com/onsi/gomega"
Code change:
[x] write e2e tests for all admission operations [x] (for resource APIs) [x] (for discovery docs) [x] switch to v1 admission APIs in e2e - [x] remove skips/time.Sleeps - and promote to conformance tests - AdmissionWebhook should have tests for all stable operations. Those tests should go through the conformance process before being released. This ticket is to help track what operations are yet to be covered by conformance tests. These stable endpoints should be hit by e2e tests tagged with [conformance]. There are tests currently hitting 6 of the corresponding beta endpoints that could be updated to use stable. Tests should be written to exercise the remaining 9 untested stable endpoints as well. These twelve tests could be updated to use the stable API, and subsequently promoted to conformance. / ! ! These will need tests written for them.  untested beta/admissionregistration !
/sig api-machinery
/assign
/area conformance
/assign ^ This is a requirement for graduation to GA.
can we get another apisnoop run? We've coverage for admissionregistration and apiextensions and I'd like to get confirmation from apisnoop that we've got full coverage now.
Keeping this open until tests are actually promoted to conformance
is ready for review. It adds our admission e2e tests to conformance as part of graduation to GA.
is updated currently not hit by any tests, one will need to be updated or written to cover it. Might want to ensure you've promoted one test that hit's each endpoint. !
The PR to do that is at

Related discussion:
text: } func nonCompliantConfigMap(f *framework.Framework) *v1.ConfigMap { <ins> return namedNonCompliantConfigMap(disallowedConfigMapName, f) } func namedNonCompliantConfigMap(name string, f *framework.Framework) *v1.ConfigMap { </ins> return &v1.ConfigMap{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ <del> Name: disallowedConfigMapName, </del> <ins> Name: name, </ins> }, Data: map[string]string{ "webhook-e2e-test": "webhook-disallow",
Code change:
[x] write e2e tests for all admission operations [x] (for resource APIs) [x] (for discovery docs) [x] switch to v1 admission APIs in e2e - [x] remove skips/time.Sleeps - and promote to conformance tests - AdmissionWebhook should have tests for all stable operations. Those tests should go through the conformance process before being released. This ticket is to help track what operations are yet to be covered by conformance tests. These stable endpoints should be hit by e2e tests tagged with [conformance]. There are tests currently hitting 6 of the corresponding beta endpoints that could be updated to use stable. Tests should be written to exercise the remaining 9 untested stable endpoints as well. These twelve tests could be updated to use the stable API, and subsequently promoted to conformance. / ! ! These will need tests written for them.  untested beta/admissionregistration !
/sig api-machinery
/assign
/area conformance
/assign ^ This is a requirement for graduation to GA.
can we get another apisnoop run? We've coverage for admissionregistration and apiextensions and I'd like to get confirmation from apisnoop that we've got full coverage now.
Keeping this open until tests are actually promoted to conformance
is ready for review. It adds our admission e2e tests to conformance as part of graduation to GA.
is updated currently not hit by any tests, one will need to be updated or written to cover it. Might want to ensure you've promoted one test that hit's each endpoint. !
The PR to do that is at

Related discussion:
text: } func toBeMutatedConfigMap(f *framework.Framework) *v1.ConfigMap { <ins> return namedToBeMutatedConfigMap("to-be-mutated", f) } func namedToBeMutatedConfigMap(name string, f *framework.Framework) *v1.ConfigMap { </ins> return &v1.ConfigMap{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ <del> Name: "to-be-mutated", </del> <ins> Name: name, </ins> }, Data: map[string]string{ "mutation-start": "yes",
Code change:
<!-- Please use this template while reporting a bug and provide as much info as possible. Not doing so may result in your bug not being addressed in a timely manner. Thanks! If the matter is security related, please disclose it privately via --What happened: With kubectl v1.16.0-alpha.2, completion with override flags fails. then hit TAB will produce error "resource type must be specified" What you expected to happen: It must show the namespaces without error. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): With kubectl v1.16.0-alpha.2, then hit TAB key. Anything else we need to know?: It looks like introduced this regression. Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): kubectl v1.16.0-alpha.2 Cloud provider or hardware configuration: OS (e.g: ): Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others:
/sig cli
I also reproduced this bug with the following steps:
I'm fixing it.

Related discussion:
text: done for var in "${__kubectl_override_flag_list[@]##*-}"; do if eval "test -n "$${var}""; then <del> eval "echo ${${var}}" </del> <ins> eval "echo -n ${${var}}' '" </ins> fi done }
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting enhancement requests --What would you like to be : We need to enhance Azure cloud provider code to support both AAD and ADFS authentication. Why is this needed: On Azure Stack customer can have two type of deployment .
/sig azure
/assign

Related discussion:
text: "crypto/x509" "fmt" "io/ioutil" <ins> "strings" </ins> "github.com/Azure/go-autorest/autorest/adal" "github.com/Azure/go-autorest/autorest/azure"
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting enhancement requests --What would you like to be : We need to enhance Azure cloud provider code to support both AAD and ADFS authentication. Why is this needed: On Azure Stack customer can have two type of deployment .
/sig azure
/assign

Related discussion:
text: var ( // ErrorNoAuth indicates that no credentials are provided. ErrorNoAuth = fmt.Errorf("no credentials provided for Azure cloud provider") <ins> // ADFSIdentitySystem indicates value of tenantId for ADFS on Azure Stack. ADFSIdentitySystem = "ADFS" </ins> ) // AzureAuthConfig holds auth related part of cloud config
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting enhancement requests --What would you like to be : We need to enhance Azure cloud provider code to support both AAD and ADFS authentication. Why is this needed: On Azure Stack customer can have two type of deployment .
/sig azure
/assign

Related discussion:
text: UserAssignedIdentityID string `json:"userAssignedIdentityID,omitempty" yaml:"userAssignedIdentityID,omitempty"` // The ID of the Azure Subscription that the cluster is deployed in SubscriptionID string `json:"subscriptionId,omitempty" yaml:"subscriptionId,omitempty"` <ins> // Identity system value for the deployment. This gets populate for Azure Stack case. IdentitySystem string `json:"identitySystem,omitempty" yaml:"identitySystem,omitempty"` </ins> } // GetServicePrincipalToken creates a new service principal token based on the configuration func GetServicePrincipalToken(config *AzureAuthConfig, env *azure.Environment) (*adal.ServicePrincipalToken, error) { <ins> var tenantID string if strings.EqualFold(config.IdentitySystem, ADFSIdentitySystem) { tenantID = "adfs" } else { tenantID = config.TenantID } </ins> if config.UseManagedIdentityExtension { klog.V(2).Infoln("azure: using managed identity extension to retrieve access token") msiEndpoint, err := adal.GetMSIVMEndpoint()
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting enhancement requests --What would you like to be : We need to enhance Azure cloud provider code to support both AAD and ADFS authentication. Why is this needed: On Azure Stack customer can have two type of deployment .
/sig azure
/assign

Related discussion:
text: env.ServiceManagementEndpoint) } <del> oauthConfig, err := adal.NewOAuthConfig(env.ActiveDirectoryEndpoint, config.TenantID) </del> <ins> oauthConfig, err := adal.NewOAuthConfig(env.ActiveDirectoryEndpoint, tenantID) </ins> if err != nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("creating the OAuth config: %v", err) }
Code change:
This issue was reported in the Description The container manager used in kubelet checks for docker daemon process either via pidfile or process name. While the pidfile points to the docker daemon process PID, the dockerProcessName constant stores a docker cli name (docker) instead of docker daemon name (dockerd). Figure 30.1: Constants in file. Recommendation Correct the docker process name to dockerd. Anything else we need to know?: See for current status of all issues created from these findings. The vendor gave this issue an ID of TOB-K8S-025 and it was finding 31 of the report. The vendor considers this issue Informational Severity. To view the original finding, begin on page 77 of the Environment: Kubernetes version: 1.13.4
/sig node /kind bug /remove-kind feature
/lgtm
lol, this is the issue. my bad!

Related discussion:
text: ) const ( <del> dockerProcessName     = "docker" </del> <ins> dockerProcessName     = "dockerd" </ins> dockerPidFile         = "/var/run/docker.pid" containerdProcessName = "docker-containerd" containerdPidFile     = "/run/docker/libcontainerd/docker-containerd.pid"