[arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

newer
[arch-dev-public] Signoff report...

older
[arch-dev-public] Signoff report...

Allan McRae

27 Nov 2013 27 Nov '13

11:29 a.m.

Please don't do this... 11 line output in post_install. If you REALLY need this, use a single line pointing to the wiki page. Allan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:14:00 +0100 (CET) From: Alexander Rødseth Reply-To: Arch Linux packaging commits To: arch-commits@archlinux.org <snip> --- lxc-docker/trunk/docker.install (rev 0) +++ lxc-docker/trunk/docker.install 2013-11-27 10:14:00 UTC (rev 101542) @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +# Contributor: Nicolas Dudebout + +post_install() { + grep -q '^docker:' /etc/group || groupadd --system docker + systemctl daemon-reload + echo 'To make Docker fully functional, consider performing the following actions:' + echo ' + Start the docker daemon:' + echo ' $ sudo systemctl start docker' + echo ' + (OPTIONAL) Start the docker daemon at boot:' + echo ' $ sudo systemctl enable docker' + echo ' + Add your user to the docker group to run the docker client without sudo:' + echo ' $ sudo usermod -a -G docker <username>' + echo ' Login again for the change to take effect or run the following command' + echo ' for a change affecting only the current shell:' + echo ' $ newgrp docker' + echo ' + Enable IPv4 forwarding to allow internet connections inside the containers.' + echo ' See /etc/sysctl.d/docker.conf for WARNING and instructions.' +} +

Show replies by date

Thomas Bächler

27 Nov 27 Nov

11:35 a.m.

Am 27.11.2013 11:29, schrieb Allan McRae:

...

Please don't do this... 11 line output in post_install. If you REALLY need this, use a single line pointing to the wiki page.

Allan

Usage instructions generally don't belong into install/upgrade messages. In the best case, there is no message at all. In this case, the install message contains basic systemctl commands and networking tips, none of this is specific to docker or urgent enough to be printed during pacman.

Sébastien Luttringer

12:49 p.m.

On 27/11/2013 11:35, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...

Am 27.11.2013 11:29, schrieb Allan McRae:

...
Please don't do this... 11 line output in post_install. If you REALLY need this, use a single line pointing to the wiki page.

Allan

Usage instructions generally don't belong into install/upgrade messages. In the best case, there is no message at all.

In this case, the install message contains basic systemctl commands and networking tips, none of this is specific to docker or urgent enough to be printed during pacman.

This package has been pushed to svn too quicly. A discussion has been started in aur-general[1] and I stated that I'll managing addition. After a quick talk with Allan, I sent a mail to Daniel, to see if we can use the name docker for the new package instead of docker-io or lxc-docker. Let time to Daniel to answer. On the technical standpoint, this package needs refactoring, maybe build the binary from the source and not use the binary provided by dotcloud/docker inc. This needs more work to be done. Cheers, [1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-November/026223.htm... -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Tom Gundersen

12:58 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...

On 27/11/2013 11:35, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...
Am 27.11.2013 11:29, schrieb Allan McRae:

...
Please don't do this... 11 line output in post_install. If you REALLY need this, use a single line pointing to the wiki page.

Allan

Usage instructions generally don't belong into install/upgrade messages. In the best case, there is no message at all.

In this case, the install message contains basic systemctl commands and networking tips, none of this is specific to docker or urgent enough to be printed during pacman.

This package has been pushed to svn too quicly. A discussion has been started in aur-general[1] and I stated that I'll managing addition.

After a quick talk with Allan, I sent a mail to Daniel, to see if we can use the name docker for the new package instead of docker-io or lxc-docker. Let time to Daniel to answer.

On the technical standpoint, this package needs refactoring, maybe build the binary from the source and not use the binary provided by dotcloud/docker inc. This needs more work to be done.

Cheers,

[1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-November/026223.htm...

This makes sense to me. It may be worth noting that the 'old' docker is installed by roughly 1% of our users, but according to their website is meant for use with GNOME2 and KDE3, which we don't even ship any more. I'd say dropping or renaming it makes the most sense and let this new package take the name 'docker', as that's what people will be looking for. Cheers, Tom

Alexander Rødseth

1:30 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Hi, The lxc-docker package as work in progress and was never pushed anywhere (only checked in to SVN). The post_install function was copied directly from the lxc-docker-nightly package on AUR (and proper credits were given), but testing, fixing and polish had not yet been applied to the PKGBUILD and the accompanying .install file. Also, docker probably needs to be built from a specific git revision (or tag/branch, if upstream makes that available). I fully agree that instructions that verbose does not belong in official packages. -- Sincerely, Alexander Rødseth xyproto / TU

Daniel Isenmann

2:19 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Am 27.11.2013 12:58, schrieb Tom Gundersen:

...

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 11:35, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...
Am 27.11.2013 11:29, schrieb Allan McRae:

...
Please don't do this... 11 line output in post_install. If you REALLY need this, use a single line pointing to the wiki page.

Allan Usage instructions generally don't belong into install/upgrade messages. In the best case, there is no message at all.

In this case, the install message contains basic systemctl commands and networking tips, none of this is specific to docker or urgent enough to be printed during pacman.

This package has been pushed to svn too quicly. A discussion has been started in aur-general[1] and I stated that I'll managing addition.

After a quick talk with Allan, I sent a mail to Daniel, to see if we can use the name docker for the new package instead of docker-io or lxc-docker. Let time to Daniel to answer.

On the technical standpoint, this package needs refactoring, maybe build the binary from the source and not use the binary provided by dotcloud/docker inc. This needs more work to be done.

Cheers,

[1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-November/026223.htm... This makes sense to me. It may be worth noting that the 'old' docker is installed by roughly 1% of our users, but according to their website is meant for use with GNOME2 and KDE3, which we don't even ship any more. I'd say dropping or renaming it makes the most sense and let this new package take the name 'docker', as that's what people will be looking for.

Cheers,

Tom

Hi, the 'old' docker ist mainly used for windowmaker and not GNOME2 or KDE3. Beside that it's working very well even it wasn't updated for decades. Nevertheless I don't care what package name the 'old' docker have, so feel free to rename it to 'docker-tray' or something similar. But I don't see the case for moving or dropping it out of extra. But how can we rename it without much hassle for the user? A provide line in the PKGBUILD isn't possible if the 'new' docker is called docker or am I wrong on this? Cheers, Daniel

Alexander Rødseth

2:29 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Good question. Could pre_upgrade bail out if the old version of docker is present on the system, giving a message that the user probably wants to install docker-tray instead? - Alexander / xyproto

Allan McRae

2:34 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 27/11/13 23:29, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...

Good question.

Could pre_upgrade bail out if the old version of docker is present on the system, giving a message that the user probably wants to install docker-tray instead?

No. A versioned replace might be possible...

Alexander Rødseth

2:43 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Something like: replaces=('docker=1.5') in the docker-tray PKGBUILD? Isn't that equally problematic, since that could cause problems if docker (currently at version 0.7) reached version 1.5? - Alexander / xyproto

Tom Gundersen

2:48 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...

Something like:

replaces=('docker=1.5')

in the docker-tray PKGBUILD?

Isn't that equally problematic, since that could cause problems if docker (currently at version 0.7) reached version 1.5?

I guess this could be simply solved by introducing the new docker with epoch=1...?

Alexander Rødseth

2:57 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;) Summary / suggsted plan: 1. Rename docker (the old one) to docker-tray and add replaces=('docker=1.5') 2. Upload and add epoch=1 to docker (the new one) I can do step 2 if someone can handle step 1. - Alexander / xyproto

Thomas Bächler

2:59 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Am 27.11.2013 14:57, schrieb Alexander Rødseth:

...

A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;)

Summary / suggsted plan: 1. Rename docker (the old one) to docker-tray and add replaces=('docker=1.5')

Shouldn't that be 'docker<=1.5'?

...

2. Upload and add epoch=1 to docker (the new one)

I can do step 2 if someone can handle step 1.

Alexander Rødseth

3:01 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

...

Shouldn't that be 'docker<=1.5'?

I thought users were not supported if they did not have an up to date system, but I guess it doesn't hurt. - Alexander / xyproto

Sébastien Luttringer

3:31 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...

A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;)

Summary / suggsted plan: 1. Rename docker (the old one) to docker-tray and add replaces=('docker=1.5') 2. Upload and add epoch=1 to docker (the new one)

I can do step 2 if someone can handle step 1.

To sum up the discution on IRC, there is no hurry to do that. I'm waiting some answer before pushing this package in our repository. Cheers, -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Sébastien Luttringer

28 Nov 28 Nov

2:15 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...

On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...
A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;)

I'm waiting some answer before pushing this package in our repository.

I got answers/help from upstream. I want underline that they are really nice and it's a pleasure to work with them. So, I built a fresh new PKGBUILD[1] for 0.7.0. Some notes on differences with AUR version: - docker is built dynamically (and no more upstream blob) - use upstream version for bash and zsh completions - move of dockerinit from /usr/libexec to /usr/lib/docker [2] - use improved systemd service file (e.g make-rpivate) [3] Now I need to test this new package more deeply. And we're waiting for Daniel words about renaming current docker package. In case this is not possible, upstream advice to use lxc-docker[4]. Cheers, [1] https://github.com/seblu/archpkg/blob/master/docker/PKGBUILD [2] https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/pull/2924 [3] https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/pull/2925 [4] https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/blob/master/hack/PACKAGERS.md -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Daniel Isenmann

7:22 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Am 28.11.2013 02:15, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...

On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...
A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;)

I'm waiting some answer before pushing this package in our repository. I got answers/help from upstream. I want underline that they are really nice and it's a pleasure to work with them.

So, I built a fresh new PKGBUILD[1] for 0.7.0.

Some notes on differences with AUR version: - docker is built dynamically (and no more upstream blob) - use upstream version for bash and zsh completions - move of dockerinit from /usr/libexec to /usr/lib/docker [2] - use improved systemd service file (e.g make-rpivate) [3]

Now I need to test this new package more deeply.

And we're waiting for Daniel words about renaming current docker package. In case this is not possible, upstream advice to use lxc-docker[4].

I had already answered: ----- Hi, the 'old' docker ist mainly used for windowmaker and not GNOME2 or KDE3. Beside that it's working very well even it wasn't updated for decades. Nevertheless I don't care what package name the 'old' docker have, so feel free to rename it to 'docker-tray' or something similar. But I don't see the case for moving or dropping it out of extra. But how can we rename it without much hassle for the user? A provide line in the PKGBUILD isn't possible if the 'new' docker is called docker or am I wrong on this? Cheers, Daniel ------ That was the reason for the discussion about the way we should rename it and the epoch=1 solution which Alexander mentioned. ;-) Cheers, Daniel

Sébastien Luttringer

10:33 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 28/11/2013 07:22, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...

Am 28.11.2013 02:15, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...
On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...
A bit sad to be starting out the new docker package with "the mark of shame" (epoch=1), but so be it. ;)

That was the reason for the discussion about the way we should rename it and the epoch=1 solution which Alexander mentioned. ;-)

I made tests with a local repository with a docker-tray[1] package and a docker package with epoch set to 1. It replaces docker version<=1.5 and it conflicts with docker (because of /usr/bin/docker). No need to provides, there is no reverse dep on docker[2] and it will create issue in the future. It works well. Daniel, could you handle the renaming and replacing of docker by docker-tray[1] in extra (I cannot do it)? That let me push new docker as soon as it's ready. Cheers, [1] https://horus.seblu.net/~seblu/docker-tray/PKGBUILD [2] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/docker/ -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Sébastien Luttringer

4 Dec 4 Dec

12:21 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 28/11/2013 22:33, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...

On 28/11/2013 07:22, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 28.11.2013 02:15, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...
On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote: Daniel, could you handle the renaming and replacing of docker by docker-tray[1] in extra (I cannot do it)? That let me push new docker as soon as it's ready.

Daniel, "new" docker is in community svn and ready to be pushed. PKGBUILD I provided to you should allow smooth upgrade for users. Is there something I can do to help you to go through this? Cheers, -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Alexander Rødseth

9 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Could a dev please rename docker in [extra] to docker-tray and add replaces=('docker<=1.5')? Daniel Isenmann has already okayed this. - Alexander / xyproto

Ike Devolder

9:24 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 09:00:25AM +0100, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...

Could a dev please rename docker in [extra] to docker-tray and add replaces=('docker<=1.5')?

Daniel Isenmann has already okayed this.

- Alexander / xyproto

Won't this lead to a serious problem ? - i install docker (0.7.0) (the one i want is docker.io one) - i update and get docker-tray because of this replace ? -- Ike

Alexander Rødseth

11:40 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Ike, No, because the new docker package will have epoch=1, like discussed above. - Alexander / xyproto

Ike Devolder

1:21 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 11:40:58AM +0100, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

...

Ike,

No, because the new docker package will have epoch=1, like discussed above.

- Alexander / xyproto

right, sorry i forgot thx -- Ike

Daniel Isenmann

5 Dec 5 Dec

9:15 a.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Am 04.12.2013 00:21, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...

On 28/11/2013 22:33, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 28/11/2013 07:22, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 28.11.2013 02:15, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...
On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote: Daniel, could you handle the renaming and replacing of docker by docker-tray[1] in extra (I cannot do it)? That let me push new docker as soon as it's ready.

Daniel,

"new" docker is in community svn and ready to be pushed. PKGBUILD I provided to you should allow smooth upgrade for users. Is there something I can do to help you to go through this?

Cheers,

Can another dev do this step? I have nearly no free time at the moment to do anything. Would be great if someone can do this. Thanks Daniel

Sébastien Luttringer

1:05 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

On 05/12/2013 09:15, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...

Am 04.12.2013 00:21, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...
On 28/11/2013 22:33, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 28/11/2013 07:22, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 28.11.2013 02:15, schrieb Sébastien Luttringer:

...
On 27/11/2013 15:31, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

...
On 27/11/2013 14:57, Alexander Rødseth wrote: Daniel, could you handle the renaming and replacing of docker by docker-tray[1] in extra (I cannot do it)? That let me push new docker as soon as it's ready.

Daniel,

"new" docker is in community svn and ready to be pushed. PKGBUILD I provided to you should allow smooth upgrade for users. Is there something I can do to help you to go through this?

Cheers,

Can another dev do this step? I have nearly no free time at the moment to do anything. Would be great if someone can do this.

Rename was done by Bartłomiej. New docker package was pushed to community. Thanks to everyone that helped. Cheers, -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

Alexander Rødseth

2:24 p.m.

New subject: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch-commits] Commit in (9 files)

Nice work on the docker package! Thanks for pushing it. And thanks to Bartłomiej for renaming. - Alexander / xyproto

3793

Age (days ago)

3801

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

24 comments

7 participants

participants (7)

Alexander Rødseth
Allan McRae
Daniel Isenmann
Ike Devolder
Sébastien Luttringer
Thomas Bächler
Tom Gundersen