10:39 p.m.
Hello all,
On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
out yesterday[2].
At this time the following Container Images are available in the
Fedora Registry.
Base Images:
(Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
command then it will always default to "latest")
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:24
Layered Images:
(Note: Layered Images are namespaced in the registry and at this time
we are only releasing for the f25 namespace.)
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/cockpit:135-5.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/cockpit:135
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/cockpit
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-node:0.1-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-node:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-node
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-controller-manager:0.1-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-controller-manager:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-controller-manager
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/mariadb:10.1-8.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/mariadb:10.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/mariadb
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-apiserver:0.1-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-apiserver:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-apiserver
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-scheduler:0.1-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-scheduler:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-scheduler
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-master:0.1-10.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-master:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-master
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/s2i-base:1-8.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/s2i-base:1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/s2i-base
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-kubelet:0-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-kubelet:0
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-kubelet
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/flannel:0.1-8.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/flannel:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/flannel
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-proxy:0-9.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-proxy:0
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/kubernetes-proxy
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/etcd:0.1-10.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/etcd:0.1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/etcd
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/toolchain:1-7.f25docker
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/toolchain:1
registry.fedoraproject.org/f25/toolchain
The source of this content is provided in DistGit which can easily be
searched via the container pkgdb namespace[3].
As always, we welcome feedback and would encourage anyone interested
to come join the Fedora Atomic WG[0] as we continue to iterate on
integrating the Project Atomic[4] family of technologies into Fedora.
Anyone interested in contributing Container Images, please feel free
to join in and submit one for Review[5][6].
Special side note with this release, all layered images have been
rebuilt to ensure the base image they rely upon includes the fix for
CVE-2017-5461[7][8].
Thank you,
-AdamM
[0] - https://pagure.io/atomic-wg
[1] - https://docs.pagure.org/releng/
[2] -
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.o...
[3] - https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/container/%2A/
[4] - https://www.projectatomic.io/
[5] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Container:Review_Process
[6] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Container:Guidelines
[7] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440080
[8] - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-521b5e42a4
2:39 a.m.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Hello all,
On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
out yesterday[2].
At this time the following Container Images are available in the
Fedora Registry.
Base Images:
(Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
command then it will always default to "latest")
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:24
What is the relationship to docker.io/fedora?
Running docker pull for various images and then docker images, I can see
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED
SIZE
docker.io/fedora 24 f623aaef07f0 5 months ago
204.4 MB
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora 24 f623aaef07f0 5 months ago
204.4 MB
so for Fedora 24 the images are the same, but
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED
SIZE
docker.io/fedora 25 15895ef0b3b2 6 days ago
230.9 MB
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora 25 b414411f6e00 7 days ago
230.9 MB
So it looks like docker.io/fedora has newer Fedora 25 image than
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora. Is that expected?
If we are building building images
FROM fedora:25
should we start using
FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
instead in Dockerfiles? If merely fedora does not point to whatever
is the authoritative location for Fedora images, shouldn't it be purged
in docker.io to avoid confusion?
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
9:03 a.m.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> Hello all,
> On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
> Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
> Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
> out yesterday[2].
>
> At this time the following Container Images are available in the
> Fedora Registry.
>
> Base Images:
>
> (Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
> tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
> command then it will always default to "latest")
>
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:24
What is the relationship to docker.io/fedora?
Running docker pull for various images and then docker images, I can see
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED
SIZE
docker.io/fedora 24 f623aaef07f0 5 months ago
204.4 MB
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora 24 f623aaef07f0 5 months ago
204.4 MB
so for Fedora 24 the images are the same, but
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED
SIZE
docker.io/fedora 25 15895ef0b3b2 6 days ago
230.9 MB
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora 25 b414411f6e00 7 days ago
230.9 MB
So it looks like docker.io/fedora has newer Fedora 25 image than
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora. Is that expected?
If we are building building images
FROM fedora:25
should we start using
FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
instead in Dockerfiles? If merely fedora does not point to whatever
is the authoritative location for Fedora images, shouldn't it be purged
in docker.io to avoid confusion?
We do have 'FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25' in our
Container Guidelines[0] today.
As a note though, we do maintain the docker base images on the Docker
Hub also, they are made from the same rootfs of the Fedora Official
ones that comes from Koji but we have to extract the rootfs from the
archive file and add a Dockerfile to comply with Docker Library's
upload workflow[1]. However, we do not upload pre-GA Releases
(branched) or rawhide to Docker Hub currently because of this added
manual work that is required.
We are also aiming to sync out all layered image content to Docker Hub
(and potentially other publicly available registries such as Quay.io)
but that is not currently high in priority. Hopefully in the next
couple months. As a point of note, layered image content can easily be
sync'd via the fedora Docker Hub account once the automatic release
process is in place (currently being worked on[2]) but base images are
considered special.
-AdamM
[0] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Container:Guidelines
[1] - https://github.com/fedora-cloud/docker-brew-fedora
[2] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReleaseEngineeringAutomationWorkfl...
>
> --
> Jan Pazdziora
> Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list -- cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
6:49 a.m.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:03:48AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Jan Pazdziora
<jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> If we are building building images
>
> FROM fedora:25
>
> should we start using
>
> FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25
>
> instead in Dockerfiles? If merely fedora does not point to whatever
> is the authoritative location for Fedora images, shouldn't it be purged
> in docker.io to avoid confusion?
We do have 'FROM registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25' in our
Container Guidelines[0] today.
Ah, thank you for pointing that out.
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
6:55 a.m.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Hello all,
On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
out yesterday[2].
At this time the following Container Images are available in the
Fedora Registry.
Base Images:
(Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
command then it will always default to "latest")
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
The current registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide and
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27 image 202b880ac136 says it's
7 weeks old,
Fedora 26 image is 4 months old.
What are the plans for respining these images on regular basis?
Especially the development "releases" tend to change quite heaving and
if we do not want to encourage the use of
RUN dnf upgrade -y
in every Dockerfile, we might want to make it easy for people to
consume fresh content.
Incidently, registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 is rather new, just
13 days old.
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
1:59 p.m.
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> Hello all,
> On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
> Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
> Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
> out yesterday[2].
>
> At this time the following Container Images are available in the
> Fedora Registry.
>
>
> Base Images:
>
> (Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
> tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
> command then it will always default to "latest")
>
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
The current registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide and
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27 image 202b880ac136 says it's
7 weeks old,
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
Fedora 26 image is 4 months old.
What are the plans for respining these images on regular basis?
Especially the development "releases" tend to change quite heaving and
if we do not want to encourage the use of
RUN dnf upgrade -y
in every Dockerfile, we might want to make it easy for people to
consume fresh content.
Incidently, registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 is rather new, just
13 days old.
Yes, the current stable is planned to be respun on a two-week average.
The others as well but they aren't priority right now. There's an
automation process in the works and once that is done then all of
these will happen automatically.
-AdamM
>
> --
> Jan Pazdziora
> Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list -- cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
7:22 a.m.
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 01:59:36PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jan Pazdziora
<jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
>> Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
>> Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
>> out yesterday[2].
>>
>> At this time the following Container Images are available in the
>> Fedora Registry.
>>
>>
>> Base Images:
>>
>> (Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and the
"rawhide"
>> tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
>> command then it will always default to "latest")
>>
>> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
>> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
>> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
>
> The current registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide and
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27 image 202b880ac136 says it's
> 7 weeks old,
>
>> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
>
> Fedora 26 image is 4 months old.
>
> What are the plans for respining these images on regular basis?
> Especially the development "releases" tend to change quite heaving and
> if we do not want to encourage the use of
>
> RUN dnf upgrade -y
>
> in every Dockerfile, we might want to make it easy for people to
> consume fresh content.
>
> Incidently, registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 is rather new, just
> 13 days old.
Yes, the current stable is planned to be respun on a two-week average.
The others as well but they aren't priority right now. There's an
automation process in the works and once that is done then all of
these will happen automatically.
One problem with the current Fedora 26 image is that it enables
rawhide repo and not the 26 development repo. So anybody using that
image to build something which installs additional packages will get
Fedora 27, not Fedora 26 packages installed.
Could the registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26 be respun to point to
the correct Fedora 26 package source?
Thank you,
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
10:47 p.m.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 01:59:36PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> >> Hello all,
> >> On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
> >> Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora Layered
> >> Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release that came
> >> out yesterday[2].
> >>
> >> At this time the following Container Images are available in the
> >> Fedora Registry.
> >>
> >>
> >> Base Images:
> >>
> >> (Note that the "latest" tag currently points to "25" and
the "rawhide"
> >> tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in your pull
> >> command then it will always default to "latest")
> >>
> >> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
> >> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
> >> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
> >
> > The current registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide and
> > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27 image 202b880ac136 says it's
> > 7 weeks old,
> >
> >> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
> >
> > Fedora 26 image is 4 months old.
> >
> > What are the plans for respining these images on regular basis?
> > Especially the development "releases" tend to change quite heaving
and
> > if we do not want to encourage the use of
> >
> > RUN dnf upgrade -y
> >
> > in every Dockerfile, we might want to make it easy for people to
> > consume fresh content.
> >
> > Incidently, registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 is rather new, just
> > 13 days old.
>
> Yes, the current stable is planned to be respun on a two-week average.
> The others as well but they aren't priority right now. There's an
> automation process in the works and once that is done then all of
> these will happen automatically.
One problem with the current Fedora 26 image is that it enables
rawhide repo and not the 26 development repo. So anybody using that
image to build something which installs additional packages will get
Fedora 27, not Fedora 26 packages installed.
Could the registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26 be respun to point to
the correct Fedora 26 package source?
Absolutely. I went to look into that today but the koji builder tasks
were having an issue for the last few weeks. It turns out that there
was a bug in oz (which is used in image builds in koji). This has been
fixed and we should be able to get updates out tomorrow.
-AdamM
> Thank you,
>
> --
> Jan Pazdziora
> Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list -- cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
10:04 a.m.
El mié, 10-05-2017 a las 22:47 -0500, Adam Miller escribió:
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Jan Pazdziora
<jpazdziora(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 01:59:36PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora@redhat.
> > com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:39:22PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > > On behalf of the Fedora Atomic WG[0] and Fedora Release
> > > > Engineering[1], I am pleased to announce the latest Fedora
> > > > Layered
> > > > Image Release. This follows the latest Atomic Host Release
> > > > that came
> > > > out yesterday[2].
> > > >
> > > > At this time the following Container Images are available in
> > > > the
> > > > Fedora Registry.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Base Images:
> > > >
> > > > (Note that the "latest" tag currently points to
"25" and the
> > > > "rawhide"
> > > > tag currently points to "27", if no tag is provided in
your
> > > > pull
> > > > command then it will always default to "latest")
> > > >
> > > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:latest
> > > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide
> > > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27
> > >
> > > The current registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide and
> > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:27 image 202b880ac136 says
> > > it's
> > > 7 weeks old,
> > >
> > > > registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
> > >
> > > Fedora 26 image is 4 months old.
> > >
> > > What are the plans for respining these images on regular basis?
> > > Especially the development "releases" tend to change quite
> > > heaving and
> > > if we do not want to encourage the use of
> > >
> > > RUN dnf upgrade -y
> > >
> > > in every Dockerfile, we might want to make it easy for people
> > > to
> > > consume fresh content.
> > >
> > > Incidently, registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 is rather new,
> > > just
> > > 13 days old.
> >
> > Yes, the current stable is planned to be respun on a two-week
> > average.
> > The others as well but they aren't priority right now. There's an
> > automation process in the works and once that is done then all of
> > these will happen automatically.
>
> One problem with the current Fedora 26 image is that it enables
> rawhide repo and not the 26 development repo. So anybody using that
> image to build something which installs additional packages will
> get
> Fedora 27, not Fedora 26 packages installed.
>
> Could the registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26 be respun to point
> to
> the correct Fedora 26 package source?
>
Absolutely. I went to look into that today but the koji builder tasks
were having an issue for the last few weeks. It turns out that there
was a bug in oz (which is used in image builds in koji). This has
been
fixed and we should be able to get updates out tomorrow.
the bug was not in oz. I suspect it was a regression in nss, all the
gory details are in
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776
Dennis
8:16 a.m.
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
El mié, 10-05-2017 a las 22:47 -0500, Adam Miller escribió:
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > One problem with the current Fedora 26 image is that it enables
> > rawhide repo and not the 26 development repo. So anybody using that
> > image to build something which installs additional packages will
> > get
> > Fedora 27, not Fedora 26 packages installed.
> >
> > Could the registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26 be respun to point
> > to
> > the correct Fedora 26 package source?
>
> Absolutely. I went to look into that today but the koji builder tasks
> were having an issue for the last few weeks. It turns out that there
> was a bug in oz (which is used in image builds in koji). This has
> been
> fixed and we should be able to get updates out tomorrow.
the bug was not in oz. I suspect it was a regression in nss, all the
gory details are in
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776
Is the infrastructure now ready for the respin?
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
3:45 p.m.
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> El mié, 10-05-2017 a las 22:47 -0500, Adam Miller escribió:
> > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > One problem with the current Fedora 26 image is that it enables
> > > rawhide repo and not the 26 development repo. So anybody using that
> > > image to build something which installs additional packages will
> > > get
> > > Fedora 27, not Fedora 26 packages installed.
> > >
> > > Could the registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26 be respun to point
> > > to
> > > the correct Fedora 26 package source?
> >
> > Absolutely. I went to look into that today but the koji builder tasks
> > were having an issue for the last few weeks. It turns out that there
> > was a bug in oz (which is used in image builds in koji). This has
> > been
> > fixed and we should be able to get updates out tomorrow.
>
> the bug was not in oz. I suspect it was a regression in nss, all the
> gory details are in
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6776
Is the infrastructure now ready for the respin?
It appears the builds are still failing because of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447777
-AdamM
> --
> Jan Pazdziora
> Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list -- cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
9:38 a.m.
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 03:45:32PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
>
> Is the infrastructure now ready for the respin?
It appears the builds are still failing because of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447777
The bugzilla was addressed -- can we give
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
another try?
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
11:27 a.m.
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 03:45:32PM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> >
> > Is the infrastructure now ready for the respin?
>
> It appears the builds are still failing because of
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447777
The bugzilla was addressed -- can we give
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
another try?
Yes, it's on the agenda for today to go out with the layered image
release that will follow today's Atomic Host release.
-AdamM
> --
> Jan Pazdziora
> Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list -- cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
7:08 a.m.
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:27:13AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jan Pazdziora
<jpazdziora(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> The bugzilla was addressed -- can we give
>
> registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:26
>
> another try?
Yes, it's on the agenda for today to go out with the layered image
release that will follow today's Atomic Host release.
\o/
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED SIZE
registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora 26 7bb26fd96ae0 20 hours ago 230.5 MB
Thanks,
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
1:08 a.m.
New subject: registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 cannot install packages
Hello,
it seems registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:25 was recently updated to
some 10 month old version f3535ce68198 where packages cannot be
installed due to missing
/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-25-x86_64:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1460094
--
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat
2512
days inactive
2561
days old
14 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Adam Miller -
Dennis Gilmore -
Jan Pazdziora