Vendor in latest containers/storage and image

[rhatdan]

What type of PR is this?

/kind api-change
/kind bug
/kind cleanup
/kind deprecation
/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake
/kind other

What this PR does / why we need it:

How to verify it

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

None

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 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

[rhatdan]

@edsantiago Looks like a missing netavark is biting me, is this something you have fixed in newer images?

[edsantiago]

@rhatdan it's ... sigh, complicated.

• Yes, we have CI VMs available where f38 has netavark (1.9). However:
• the f39 and rawhide images have netavark-1.10.1, which is broken in some respects, and I don't know if these affect buildah; and
• my attempts to bring in netavark-1.10.2 are failing because that seems to be supercatastrophically broken. Please feel free to join the party at New VMs: we need netavark 1.10.3 automation_images#327

You are welcome to try bumping .cirrus.yml:IMAGE_SUFFIX to c20240201t143038z-f39f38d13 (what we're using in podman) and repushing. It's possible that the 1.10.1 bugs won't affect buildah. And given today's meeting-packed day, I would recommend that you just do so and let it churn away in the background. I will keep my fingers crossed.

[TomSweeneyRedHat]

@rhatdan is this a hold for v1.34.1?

[rhatdan]

Well this is not the vendor dance if that is what you are asking.