Open
Conversation
GCRev
reviewed
Mar 6, 2026
Contributor
GCRev
left a comment
GCRev
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are these .lock files all autogen?
Contributor
Author
Yeah the lock files come from running |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
So there's a bug over here around ipv4 vs ipv6 handling.
KUBERNETES_SERVICE_HOSTcomes in as something like2001:db8:1234:5678::1the parsing below doesn't work because when it's concatenated withKUBERNETES_SERVICE_PORTit ends up with something like,https://2001:db8:1234:5678::1:443This checks if
:is in theKUBERNETES_SERVICE_HOSTif it is it assume ipv6 and properly places[]. So you end up with something like this,https://[2001:db8:1234:5678::1]:443