How long does it take upstream fixes to make it into fedora-iot, or can I deploy rawhide packages to f-iot images ? - I’d guess not.
I’ve just found that the latest version of podman enables me to run systemd inside a container, which the current version in f29 does not. I’m hoping this capability will make it easier to port a bunch of existing systemd services.
tc
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 12:17 PM Tim Coote tim+fedoraproject.org@coote.org wrote:
How long does it take upstream fixes to make it into fedora-iot, or can I deploy rawhide packages to f-iot images ? – I’d guess not.
I’ve just found that the latest version of podman enables me to run systemd inside a container, which the current version in f29 does not. I’m hoping this capability will make it easier to port a bunch of existing systemd services.
There's no defined time, that is all up to the maintainers of each individual package. In some cases there may be a lot of incompatible changes so it might be too much work to push the change to a stable release. It might bump a ABI and hence require a rebuild of all dependencies.
In the case of podman they often will rebase to newer major versions in f29 when they consider them stable. You don't mention the version number, exact details tend to be useful in this context.
Peter
In the case of podman they often will rebase to newer major versions in f29 when they consider them stable. You don't mention the version number, exact details tend to be useful in this context.
Sorry, half asleep: issue here: https://u8538325.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/click?upn=YKnOrpjBkiBX5bFl4-2BXAlLwGtnAj... failed for me with `podman version 0.10.1.3`, worked with `podman-0.11.1-1.gita4adfe5.fc29.x86_64` (for libpod folks), and `podman-0.11.2-4.dev.gitea928f2.fc30.x86_64`, from rawhide for me. Validated on x86 based systems, so I was quite keen to confirm that it worked on aarch64, as, afaict, the failures that I had with the early version differed on the two h/w architectures.
tc
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 1:02 PM Tim Coote tim+fedoraproject.org@coote.org wrote:
In the case of podman they often will rebase to newer major versions in f29 when they consider them stable. You don't mention the version number, exact details tend to be useful in this context.
Sorry, half asleep: issue here: http://bit.ly/2DyS8B8 https://u8538325.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/click?upn=YKnOrpjBkiBX5bFl4-2BXAlP8Q5Xl68Rh0sf8vr5-2F-2F7LQ-3D_F6S8EWobU9vyJEk1cEkDmBVnQaoGj4VAs39boBnGMrsR4kUznV454hNzu0rLcOeSkHk-2FwRc5dv29093vKkwykj8YZ5X4SbJN7AiVip4DaDl78zGSPOMVt2qDdWoHv2RFgT5xd6gdNpqVI4qcu25gp23CPK-2BrNQuuXANk1-2FtIT7tyItDAW5BmywUoNjVk5jac-2FpZdOzZoAnvtgIfHdG8IUiMvSiElRbKoea5ueyPBA28-3D. failed for me with `podman version 0.10.1.3`, worked with `podman-0.11.1-1.gita4adfe5.fc29.x86_64` (for libpod folks), and `podman-0.11.2-4.dev.gitea928f2.fc30.x86_64`, from rawhide for me. Validated on x86 based systems, so I was quite keen to confirm that it worked on aarch64, as, afaict, the failures that I had with the early version differed on the two h/w architectures.
It's in f29 updates-testing but it's broken in various ways so I doubt it'll land stable until the issues are resolved.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c67b523a2d