cri-o: fix duplicate top-level "auths" keys in registry config template

[accuROAMC]

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

The config.json.j2 template for CRI-O was generating invalid JSON when multiple
crio_registry_auth entries were defined, resulting in multiple top-level
"auths" objects being rendered, for example:

{
  "auths": { "registry1": { "auth": "xxxx" } },
  "auths": { "registry2": { "auth": "yyyy" } }
}

This change moves the loop inside a single "auths" object so that all registries
are rendered as siblings under one top-level "auths" key, producing valid Docker
config JSON:

{
  "auths": {
    "registry1": { "auth": "xxxx" },
    "registry2": { "auth": "yyyy" }
  }
}

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

None filed — this fixes a template bug.

Special notes for your reviewer:

This is a straightforward template fix; no additional testing required beyond
normal CI.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

release-note

Fixed an issue in the config.json.j2 template where the CRI-O registry authentication configuration could render invalid JSON when multiple crio_registry_auth entries were defined, resulting in duplicate top-level auths keys in the generated config.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: accuROAMC
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign vannten for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: accuROAMC / name: Martin Cahill (6bcc68a)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @accuROAMC!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/kubespray 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/kubespray has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @accuROAMC. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[VannTen]

/ok-to-test

This looks fine but can you provide a release-note explaining the problem fixed ?

[k8s-ci-robot]

Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[accuROAMC]

/ok-to-test

This looks fine but can you provide a release-note explaining the problem fixed ?

Did that - hope it is ok.