kc.loadFromCluster() doesn't setup `getCurrentCluster()` correctly.

[koooge]

Hi there,
patch-example.js doesn't work with kc.loadFromCluster() instead of kc.loadFromDefault(). The app is running in a pod, and it causes Error: Cluster is undefined #2117 (comment)

I'm not sure if it's a bug or if there is another usage to fix it. At least, loadFromCluster works in v0 for me.

[brendandburns]

it looks like currentCluster is undefined in the loadFromCluster function. You could try substituting getClusters()[0] instead of getCurrentCluster() and see if that works.

But we should probably check and fix to make it so that getCurrentCluster() works.

[cjihrig]

I think this is a minimal reproduction:

import * as k8s from '@kubernetes/client-node';
const kc = new k8s.KubeConfig();
kc.loadFromCluster();
const currentContext = kc.getCurrentContext();
const currentCluster = kc.getCluster(currentContext);
console.log(currentCluster); // Logs null

When kc.loadFromCluster() is called, kc.clusters is set to:

[
  {
      name: 'inCluster',
      caFile: `${pathPrefix}${SERVICEACCOUNT_CA_PATH}`,
      server: `${scheme}://${serverHost}:${port}`,
      skipTLSVerify: false,
  },
]

The call to kc.getCurrentContext() always returns the value 'inClusterContext'.

So, you're always executing kc.getCluster('inClusterContext'). Internally, this searches the list of clusters for one whose name is 'inClusterContext'. A cluster with the same name as the context does not exist.

[cjihrig]

But we should probably check and fix to make it so that getCurrentCluster() works.

It looks like that does work.

[cjihrig]

@koooge can you confirm if changing the code from kc.getCluster(currentContext); to kc.getCurrentCluster(); gets you past that error. It seems to me like the example should be using that code.

[brendandburns]

@cjihrig thanks for looking closer at this. You are correct, there is a bug in the code from @koooge

It should be:

kc.getCluster(kc.getContextObject(kc.getCurrentContext()).cluster)

but really kc.getCurrentCluster() is easier.

I did notice that our code coverage for this code is low, so I added #2191

I'm going to close this as working as intended.