On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 19:28 +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 12:37 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 19:07 +0000, Chris Kelley wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have a GitHub Action
> > (
https://github.com/dogtagpki/jss/actions/runs/5810230552/job/15794
> > 978022) that fails due to a conflict between dnf and dnf5 when
> > using the rawhide docker image. I have been trying to keep up with
> > the dnf/dnf5 revert story, but I may have missed something about
> > the current state of affairs/expectations around it working without
> > issue. I am not sure to whom I should raise this issue, any
> > suggestions welcome - thanks!
>
> Not sure what the specific issue is here, but in general, we
> recommend
> against pulling from the Docker registry, as it is not updated very
> often. It's much better to pull from
registry.fedoraproject.org or
> quay.io , as those are updated with every Rawhide compose.
Hi,
It seems that
https://registry.fedoraproject.org/repo/fedora/tags/ is
quite outdated (contrary to
https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora ).
This is quite bad, if I run
podman run -ti fedora:39
it will get the image from
registry.fedoraproject.org (due to
/etc/containers/registries.conf). The problem is, that this image is
from August and still points to Rawhide. So the first `dnf upgrade`
installs fc40 packages, which results in a broken installation.
Workaround:
podman run -ti docker.io/fedora:39
Is this a known issue? Am I doing something wrong? Where would I report
this?
Neither I nor nirik can reproduce this as described. Note the web UI is
basically just lies / incomplete info; I think it's telling you when
the tag was created, not when the image behind it was last updated.
This is what I get trying to reproduce:
[adamw@xps13a Oneplus 9]$ podman run -ti fedora:39
Resolved "fedora" as an alias
(/etc/containers/registries.conf.d/000-shortnames.conf)
Trying to pull
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:39...
Getting image source signatures
Copying blob 6eb636413202 done |
Copying config ec546109f8 done |
Writing manifest to image destination
[root@ee928f4eb27a /]# dnf update
Fedora 39 - x86_64
31 MB/s | 89 MB
00:02
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64
1.2 kB/s | 2.5 kB
00:02
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates
393 kB/s | 12 MB
00:32
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:01 ago on Mon Nov 13 19:00:36 2023.
Dependencies resolved.
=============================================================================================================================================================================================
Package Architecture
Version Repository
Size
=============================================================================================================================================================================================
Upgrading:
dnf noarch
4.18.1-1.fc39 updates
508 k
dnf-data noarch
4.18.1-1.fc39 updates
39 k
elfutils-default-yama-scope noarch
0.190-1.fc39 updates
14 k
elfutils-libelf x86_64
0.190-1.fc39 updates
195 k
elfutils-libs x86_64
0.190-1.fc39 updates
260 k
gnupg2 x86_64
2.4.3-4.fc39 updates
2.6 M
python3-dnf noarch
4.18.1-1.fc39 updates
589 k
yum noarch
4.18.1-1.fc39 updates
37 k
Transaction Summary
=============================================================================================================================================================================================
Upgrade 8 Packages
Total download size: 4.2 M
Is this ok [y/N]:
i.e. it's not a Rawhide image, updating uses F39 repos, and only a
small number of updates is available (indicating the image is recent).
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw(a)fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net