[202205] Advance sonic-dbsyncd submodule

[vivekrnv]

4dcfb61 Handled the error case of negative age (https://github.com/sonic-net/sonic-buildimage/pull/57)

Why I did it

How I did it

How to verify it

Which release branch to backport (provide reason below if selected)

• 201811
• 201911
• 202006
• 202012
• 202106
• 202111
• 202205
• 202211

Description for the changelog

Ensure to add label/tag for the feature raised. example - PR#2174 under sonic-utilities repo. where, Generic Config and Update feature has been labelled as GCU.

Link to config_db schema for YANG module changes

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)

[vivekrnv]

/azpw run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[mssonicbld]

/AzurePipelines run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[vivekrnv]

/azpw run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[mssonicbld]

/AzurePipelines run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[vivekrnv]

/azpw run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[mssonicbld]

/AzurePipelines run Azure.sonic-buildimage

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[liat-grozovik]

@yxieca should we create a branch for this repo in 202205 instead of taking master into it?
from my POV the major fix is in one commit: Handled the error case of negative age.

[yxieca]

@yxieca should we create a branch for this repo in 202205 instead of taking master into it? from my POV the major fix is in one commit: Handled the error case of negative age.

Sounds like we are deviating from the master branch? If so, we should create 202205 branch. Please confirm.

[vivekrnv]

@yxieca should we create a branch for this repo in 202205 instead of taking master into it? from my POV the major fix is in one commit: Handled the error case of negative age.

Sounds like we are deviating from the master branch? If so, we should create 202205 branch. Please confirm.

Yeah i think so.

[yxieca]

@yxieca should we create a branch for this repo in 202205 instead of taking master into it? from my POV the major fix is in one commit: Handled the error case of negative age.

Sounds like we are deviating from the master branch? If so, we should create 202205 branch. Please confirm.

Yeah i think so.

#14307