[release/8.0] Don't assume all S_IFREG files are seekable #122188
Conversation
|
Do we need separate approval or was it covered by the one for 9.0/10.10? And should this be release/8.0 r release/8.0-staging? |
|
Tell mode, we're good to go when tests pass. |
|
/ba-g Test failures around X509Certificates are unrelated |
It should be @ViktorHofer what should we do in this case? |
@rzikm nothing, staging is there just to let authors merge their own changes without having to wait for folks with admin permissions. Keep targeting staging in the future since that will test your change with all other changes in the release. Of course, this does not apply for 10.0 servicing. |
Backport of #120736 to release/8.0
/cc @rzikm
Customer Impact
None, the change is in Debug build only and doesn't affect shipped product.
Regression
No, test failures started after adding/updating AzureLinux3 OS in CI matrix.
Testing
CI passes.
Risk
Low, can be considered test-only change as the changes don't propagate to shipped product.