[troubleshooting] Add ryuk troubleshooting section to README

[jsmid1]

Summary

• Add troubleshooting entry for ryuk reaper container failures in acceptance tests
• Documents how to diagnose the issue by running ryuk manually and how to fix it via ~/.testcontainers.properties

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@jsmid1, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 23 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 11f2d1e4-642e-4e41-9684-144bb5f27c0b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d5c3619 and 6f49cfd.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new troubleshooting subsection is added to the README for ryuk reaper container startup failures, including a diagnostic command and the ryuk.container.privileged=true configuration setting.

Changes

Ryuk Reaper Troubleshooting Documentation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Troubleshooting subsection README.md	Adds subsection 2.4 for ryuk reaper container startup failures, including a foreground diagnostic command and ~/.testcontainers.properties guidance for ryuk.container.privileged=true.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly reflects the main change: adding a Ryuk troubleshooting section to the README.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description matches the README update and accurately describes the new Ryuk troubleshooting guidance.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[st3penta]

nice

[simonbaird]

Lgtm.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

Flag	Coverage Δ
acceptance	54.25% <ø> (ø)
generative	16.80% <ø> (ø)
integration	27.97% <ø> (ø)
unit	71.74% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[st3penta]

/ok-to-test

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 115-121: The README guidance for setting
ryuk.container.privileged=true needs an explicit scope-and-safety warning
because it affects all Testcontainers usage for that user, not just this repo.
Update the troubleshooting text around the existing Docker daemon permission
note to clearly label it as a temporary local workaround, mention the security
impact of enabling privileged Ryuk globally, and add rollback guidance to remove
or reset the ~/.testcontainers.properties entry after diagnosing the issue.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 7094679b-289b-4554-845a-5fd17f3487a1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f069923 and d5c3619.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 7:57 AM UTC · Completed 8:05 AM UTC
Commit: 47d3320 · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

Review — comment

This PR adds a clear, well-structured troubleshooting section for ryuk reaper container failures. The content is consistent with the existing acceptance/README.md documentation (lines 53–57) which already recommends the same ryuk.container.privileged=true fix. No blocking issues found.

Findings

#	Severity	File	Description
1	medium	README.md:113	Ryuk image version may not match project dependency. The diagnostic command references testcontainers/ryuk:0.11.0, but the project pins testcontainers-go v0.34.1-0.20241204123437-72be13940122 (go.mod line 47), which may default to a different ryuk version (e.g., 0.10.2). For accurate troubleshooting, the diagnostic command should use the same ryuk version that the acceptance tests actually pull. Consider noting how to find the correct version (e.g., from container runtime logs) or aligning with the project's pinned default.
2	low	README.md:117	Imprecise description of --privileged behavior. The sentence says --privileged "grant[s] it access to the Docker socket," but Docker socket access is provided by the -v bind mount. The --privileged flag disables security restrictions (SELinux, AppArmor, seccomp) that may prevent the container from using the already-mounted socket. Consider: "...allowing it to bypass security restrictions (e.g., SELinux) that may block access to the Docker socket."

Notes

• The acceptance/README.md already documents the same fix at lines 53–57, confirming this is an established project pattern.
• The heading level (####) is consistent with sibling sections 2.1 and 2.2 (section 2.3 uses ##### but that is a pre-existing inconsistency).
• No secrets, injection patterns, or security concerns found. The --privileged recommendation is appropriate for a local development troubleshooting guide.
• No linked issue, but scope authorization is implicit for a small, self-contained documentation addition.

---

Labels: PR adds a troubleshooting section to README documentation

Previous run

Looks good to me.

Findings

Low

• [edge-case] README.md:112 — The troubleshooting command hardcodes testcontainers/ryuk:0.11.0, but the actual ryuk version used at runtime is determined by the testcontainers-go library (currently v0.34.0 per acceptance/go.mod). If the library is updated, this diagnostic command will reference a different image than what tests actually use, potentially giving misleading results. Consider noting that users should check docker ps output during a test run to find the exact ryuk image tag in use.

[jsmid1]

/retest

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 8:08 AM UTC · Completed 8:15 AM UTC
Commit: 87c4a29 · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

See the review comment for full details.