- hyperkube: Use debian-hyperkube-base@v1.1.0 image
  
    A previous release built hyperkube using the debian-hyperkube-base@v1.0.0,
    which was updated to address a CVE in the CNI plugins.
    
    A side-effect of using this new image was that the networking packages
    (namely `iptables`) drifted from the versions used in the kube-proxy images.
  
    The following issues were filed on kube-proxy failures when using hyperkube:

    * This PR added a new subcommand `kustomize` in kubectl. 
    *   kubectl kustomize <somedir> has the same effect as kustomize build <somedir>
    * To build API resources from somedir with a kustomization.yaml file
    *    kubectl kustomize <somedir>
    * This command can be piped to apply or delete 

            log.error("Failed to reset SingletonContext instance", e);
            fail("Failed to reset SingletonContext instance: " + e.getMessage());
        }
        // Clear system properties that might affect the test
        System.clearProperty("jcifs.properties");
        System.clearProperty("java.protocol.handler.pkgs");
        // Clear jcifs-specific properties to prevent test interference

        // Given the current implementation, direct modification of the passed array affects the AvPair.
        // If this is not desired, a defensive copy should be added in the AvPair constructor.
        assertEquals(0x05, avPair.getRaw()[0],
                "Modifying original raw array should affect AvPair's raw data if no defensive copy is made.");
    }

  /**
   * Creates a {@code CompactHashSet} instance, with a high enough "initial capacity" that it
   * <i>should</i> hold {@code expectedSize} elements without growth.
   *
   * @param expectedSize the number of elements you expect to add to the returned set
   * @return a new, empty {@code CompactHashSet} with enough capacity to hold {@code expectedSize}
   *     elements without resizing

import com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList;
import com.google.j2objc.annotations.J2ObjCIncompatible;
import java.io.File;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.nio.file.FileSystems;
import java.nio.file.Paths;
import java.nio.file.attribute.AclEntry;
import java.nio.file.attribute.AclEntryPermission;

		t.Fatalf("should be true")
	}
	if v != "val1" {
		t.Fatalf("value differs from expected")
	}

	if !reflect.DeepEqual(lc.Keys(), []string{"key1"}) {
		t.Fatalf("value differs from expected")
	}
	if lc.Len() != 1 {
		t.Fatalf("length differs from expected")
	}

	lc.Add("key2", "val2")
	if !reflect.DeepEqual(lc.Keys(), []string{"key1", "key2"}) {
		t.Fatalf("value differs from expected")
	}
	if lc.Len() != 2 {

import com.google.common.collect.testing.features.CollectionSize;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.util.List;
import org.junit.Ignore;

/**
 * Tests for {@code Multiset#count}.
 *
 * @author Jared Levy
 */
@GwtCompatible
@Ignore("test runners must not instantiate and run this directly, only via suites we build")
// @Ignore affects the Android test runner, which respects JUnit 4 annotations on JUnit 3 tests.

* `upgrade`: Upgrades

configuration using e.g. the `mc admin config` commands you will need to adjust
your deployment.

Even though this change is backward compatible we do not expect that it affects
the vast majority of deployments in any negative way.

> Will an upgrade of an existing MinIO cluster impact the SLA of the cluster or will it even cause downtime?