Change:
Client: fake.CreateHTTPClient(func(req *http.Request) (*http.Response, error) { m := &MyReq{req} switch { <ins> case m.isFor("GET", "/nodes"): return &http.Response{StatusCode: 200, Header: defaultHeader(), Body: objBody(codec, oldNode)}, nil </ins> case m.isFor("GET", "/nodes/node-name"): return &http.Response{StatusCode: 200, Header: defaultHeader(), Body: objBody(codec, oldNode)}, nil case m.isFor("PATCH", "/nodes/node-name"):

Discussion:
<!-- Thanks for filing an issue! Before hitting the button, please answer these questions.--Is this a request for help? (If yes, you should use our troubleshooting guide and community support channels, see ): No What keywords did you search in Kubernetes issues before filing this one? (If you have found any duplicates, you should instead reply there.): taint, selector Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST? (choose one): BUG REPORT <!-- If this is a BUG REPORT, please: Fill in as much of the template below as you can. If you leave out information, we can't help you as well. If this is a FEATURE REQUEST, please: Describe in detail the feature/behavior/change you'd like to see. In both cases, be ready for followup questions, and please respond in a timely manner. If we can't reproduce a bug or think a feature already exists, we might close your issue. If we're wrong, PLEASE feel free to reopen it and explain why. --Kubernetes version (use ): Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"6", GitVersion:"v1.6.0", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2017-03-28T16:36:33Z", GoVersion:"go1.7.5", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"darwin/amd64"} Server Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"6", GitVersion:"v1.6.1", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2017-04-03T20:33:27Z", GoVersion:"go1.7.5", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"} Environment: Cloud provider or hardware configuration: GKE OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): MacOS client, linux server Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools:gcloud Others: What happened: I tried to kubectl taint some nodes using a label selector: kubectl taint nodes -l dedicated=foo dedicated=foo:PreferNoSchedule and got the error: error: at least one resource name must be specified since 'all' parameter is not set What you expected to happen: Those nodes would be tainted with dedicated=foo:PreferNoSchedule. Trying to use --all along with the selector is also not supported.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): kubectl taint nodes -l <any label selectordedicated=foo:PreferNoSchedule Anything else we need to know:
can you post the output of kubectl taint nodes -l myLabel=X dedicated=foo:PreferNoSchedule (((And first of course Make sure that myLabel is on the cluster ....)))
Would you like me to explicitly use the label "myLabel"? Otherwise that's the command and output I posted in "What happened" above. (I had set a label dedicated=foo ahead of time on two nodes.)
Ah ok so the taint k/v is the exact same as the label k/v, that makes the example tricky to parse.... but I agree .... this should work .. I can try to reproduce this....
Yup, the same k/v. (I wanted both labels and taints to determine this set of nodes, and it seemed like it would be confusing to have different k/v's for each. I kinda thought this would be the common case...)
Ah , yeah i see it to ... Even though clearly, the selector exists.
Is the taints and tolerations expert on our team. ravi can you look at ? this logic might be shadowing the label selector, such that its impossible to use labels to select the nodes you're trying to taint.
cc. m i definitely think this is a bug ... ? Looks like the taints maybe are shadowing the label selectors above in
/assign
GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: ravisantoshgudimetla. Note that only can be assigned.. <detailsIn response to : /assign Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. I understand the commands that are listed . </details
/assign
It seems the line is the culprit. Here we are checking for resources if they are 2, the resources allowed are node,nodes,no so if it needs it has to be 1 and this check is already available So, I guess its safe to remove that. I tested that functionality after removing this and it fixed the issue. I will submit a PR for this unless someone has objections.