From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18C4C1FF13E for ; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 15:32:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 26B886589; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 15:33:02 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Daniel Kral Subject: applied: [PATCH container v2 4/4] setup: make the architecture fall back to amd64 for falsy values Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 15:30:57 +0100 Message-ID: <177038825450.2774896.5556117220640752606.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260206124513.310674-5-d.kral@proxmox.com> References: <20260206124513.310674-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <20260206124513.310674-5-d.kral@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1770388268325 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.020 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: TTIIPKMEHZUHBFPAJ6PVEYMIBHMOPMXN X-Message-ID-Hash: TTIIPKMEHZUHBFPAJ6PVEYMIBHMOPMXN X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri, 06 Feb 2026 13:45:05 +0100, Daniel Kral wrote: > The architecture fallback branch relied on detect_architecture(...) > failing and therefore $arch being undef afterwards. > > However, if protected_call(sub { detect_architecture(...) }) itself > returns a defined, falsy value, such as a empty string converted from an > undef value, the 'arch' field will be set to that value, which will make > the container fail to start. > > [...] Applied, but as mentioned in my reply to 3/4 I ordered this earlier, as it's a prerequisite for this patch, thanks! [4/4] setup: make the architecture fall back to amd64 for falsy values commit: e21afdcea18be498a7a4cebf6ad2df42ddfb9caf