fix(deps): update module github.com/gorilla/schema to v1.2.1

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
github.com/gorilla/schema	require	patch	v1.2.0 -> v1.2.1

---

Release Notes

gorilla/schema (github.com/gorilla/schema)

v1.2.1

Compare Source

What's Changed

• build: use build matrix; drop Go <= 1.10 by @​elithrar in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/147
• doc: Update README CI badge by @​elithrar in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/148
• docs: remove travis badge by @​elithrar in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/149
• build: fix config.yml by @​elithrar in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/150
• [bug] Registered encoder doesn't work for struct pointer types by @​tkhametov in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/174
• Update README.md by @​coreydaley in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/197
• [GPT-98] Update go version & add verification/testing tools by @​apoorvajagtap in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/200
• fix misspell by @​YuyaAbo in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/192
• Update issues.yml by @​coreydaley in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/201
• update GitHub workflows by @​coreydaley in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/205

New Contributors

• @​tkhametov made their first contribution in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/174
• @​coreydaley made their first contribution in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/197
• @​apoorvajagtap made their first contribution in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/200
• @​YuyaAbo made their first contribution in https://github.com/gorilla/schema/pull/192

Full Changelog: gorilla/schema@v1.2.0...v1.2.1

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Never, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate. View repository job log here.

[packit-as-a-service]

Cockpit tests failed for commit 3b942ef. @martinpitt, @jelly, @mvollmer please check.

[martinpitt]

It breaks detection of multiple image tags in cockpit-podman. But podman's "own" tests also break "Podman pull [It] podman pull check all tags", which seems to be the same issue. So ignoring this for now, seems the new schema has a regression (as a microrelease shouldn't change API, but I don't know the Go world..)

[martinpitt]

Hang on, this is more complicated. We also see this regression in our "nightly podman-next" run. So it smells like some recent update in https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rhcontainerbot/podman-next broke this, and this PR is just the first one to show it on the podman side.

I can reproduce this locally, with podman-4.8.0~dev-1.20231105123207747221.main.2369.d2583c787.fc39.x86_64. Downgrading to podman-4.8.0~dev-1.20231104123157757913.main.2365.5e55d76af.fc38.x86_64 (from two days ago) doesn't help. We don't use qm, skopeo or buildah in c-podman's tests, which limits the potential culprits quite a bit.

[martinpitt]

Restricting the dnf update to only the podman next COPR still fails, so the problem isn't with the 180-odd updates from Fedora 39 proper, but somewhere in these:

Upgrading:
 aardvark-dns                   x86_64  102:1.8.0-1.20231103152128612668.main.26.g0b97b25             copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next  926 k
 container-selinux              noarch  102:2.224.0-1.20231011111242980085.main.0.g31e9f0b            copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next   49 k
 containers-common              noarch  4:1-98.fc39                                                   copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next   92 k
 containers-common-extra        noarch  4:1-98.fc39                                                   copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next   13 k
 crun                           x86_64  102:1.11-1.20231030153425093730.main.4.g42770aa               copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next  214 k
 gvisor-tap-vsock               x86_64  103:0.7.1-1.20231019152626398977.main.11.g6271c40             copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next  3.7 M
 gvisor-tap-vsock-gvforwarder   x86_64  103:0.7.1-1.20231019152626398977.main.11.g6271c40             copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next  1.8 M
 netavark                       x86_64  102:1.8.0-1.20231103122905869245.main.24.gb7e144d             copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next  3.2 M
 podman                         x86_64  102:4.8.0~dev-1.20231105123207747221.main.2369.d2583c787.fc39 copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:rhcontainerbot:podman-next   15 M

A round of bisecting shows that downgrading containers-common{,-extra} from 1-98 to 4:1-97.fc39.noarch fixes the regression. This was uploaded to Fedora 39 (with a rather questionable changelog, I may say), and apparently copied directly into podman-next, not going through a PR.

https://github.com/containers/common/commits/main shows three recent PRs: containers/common#1727 containers/common#1728 containers/common#1729

@rhatdan @lsm5 FYI

(If you want, I can set up c-podman tests for containers-common -- but I don't know about your current plans/gut feelings wrt. CI)

[Luap99]

@martinpitt containers-common only ships config files so the code changes PR in c/common real;l;y do not matter.

I suspect the config file changes in the rpm to cause the problems: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/containers-common/c/c184cbd663d9fde1f51911f588777423f709aae9?branch=rawhide

[rhatdan]

What is breaking, I am attempting to change the defaults in Rawhide to make sure zstd:chunked will work fine?

[rhatdan]

@giuseppe PTAL

[rhatdan]

@cevich How does rawhides containers.conf get involved in the testing?

[Luap99]

@cevich How does rawhides containers.conf get involved in the testing?

I don't think it ends up in the podman tests, or at least it shouldn't without an CI image update.

I think the normal podman test failures are just a coincidence with a quay.io maintenance yesterday: https://status.quay.io/
I rerun tests on #20596 and they still pass, this likely only effects the cockpit tests because they always use the latest packages from podman-next.

[cevich]

I don't think it ends up in the podman tests, or at least it shouldn't without an CI image update.

Paul's mostly correct. The only special thing we do is WRT the podman RPM. A call to remove_packaged_podman_files() removes all the RPM's files. It doesn't touch containers-common or any other package. So whatever's there at CI VM build time, is what's there for testing.

[martinpitt]

I filed issue #20611 for this regression, with a CLI reproducer.

[rhatdan]

/approve
/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: renovate[bot], rhatdan

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:

• OWNERS [rhatdan]

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