Require passt >= 0:20260526.g038c51e for pesto support

[Honny1]

Pesto and pasta's -c control socket need a recent passt build; bump the containers-common-extra dependency so rootless_port_forwarder=pasta works.

[Honny1]

@sbrivio-rh @Luap99 Since passt is releasing soon, should I put the newer version here or keep this one?

[sbrivio-rh]

@sbrivio-rh @Luap99 Since passt is releasing soon, should I put the newer version here or keep this one?

With lucky-commit (https://github.com/not-an-aardvark/lucky-commit), we could actually agree on a version name. But for everyone's sanity, I won't fake the date ;) and we don't know yet exactly what's causing https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=202, so it's difficult to predict the date.

If you need a version name right now, I'd say keep that one. Other than the SELinux annoyance it's pretty much fine, and virtually everybody will update passt and Podman at the same time anyway. If it can wait, then give us a few more days.

[Honny1]

If you need a version name right now, I'd say keep that one. Other than the SELinux annoyance it's pretty much fine, and virtually everybody will update passt and Podman at the same time anyway. If it can wait, then give us a few more days.

I think it's okay to wait, but correct me if I'm wrong. @Luap99

[sbrivio-rh]

@dgibson just posted a series fixing https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=202, so we're probably not that far from a new release anyway.

I'm now chasing a test failure I've seen but it might have been a setup issue, not sure yet.

[mtrmac]

Note to self: this should not merge before the vendor dance finishes.

[Luap99]

I don't fully get how the passt version is set but in rpm terms the actual versions seems to be
0:0^20260120.g386b5f5. I would guess the extra 0^ would mess up the version match? Not sure the packit tests check if the deps can be installed here.

cc @lsm5