Skip to content

Conversation

0ekk
Copy link
Member

@0ekk 0ekk commented Dec 19, 2024

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Dec 19, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Dec 19, 2024
@0ekk
Copy link
Member Author

0ekk commented Dec 19, 2024

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. label Dec 19, 2024
@0ekk 0ekk force-pushed the add-iproute-check branch 2 times, most recently from 23e307b to e0f1912 Compare December 19, 2024 08:28
@VannTen
Copy link
Contributor

VannTen commented Dec 19, 2024

I would rather we use the tasks in preinstall/task/0070-system-packages.yml.

Problem is, we gather ips before that, so we can't.

But I'm not sure it's a requirement, so we might try to move the tasks order.

That said, this is harder to do than this, so I'm okay with merging this, but could you add a disclaimer (Like a TODO on each of those tasks) so we don't forget about it ?

@0ekk 0ekk force-pushed the add-iproute-check branch from e0f1912 to a58cc94 Compare December 19, 2024 09:22
@0ekk
Copy link
Member Author

0ekk commented Dec 19, 2024

I would rather we use the tasks in preinstall/task/0070-system-packages.yml.

Problem is, we gather ips before that, so we can't.

Yes, sine the task execution order, this pr is just a simple and fast way to implent iproute checking, but cause redundant codes.

After it merged, we can refactor the tasks and change the tasks order

@0ekk 0ekk force-pushed the add-iproute-check branch from a58cc94 to e62f1af Compare December 19, 2024 09:29
@VannTen VannTen mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2024
@VannTen
Copy link
Contributor

VannTen commented Dec 19, 2024

/lgtm
/approve
/release-note-edit

iproute is installed before gathering facts (needed for getting `ansible_default_ipv4`)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Dec 19, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 0ekk, VannTen

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 19, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit bf70335 into kubernetes-sigs:master Dec 19, 2024
42 checks passed
kpoxo6op pushed a commit to kpoxo6op/kubespray that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Need "ip" utlity check in Kubespray Project
3 participants