-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
podman: 4.9.3 -> 5.0.1 #301553
podman: 4.9.3 -> 5.0.1 #301553
Conversation
@WxNzEMof #265409 is merged. Not sure if it needs to be update tough |
724e7a8
to
f5b40ab
Compare
Updated! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
rootless continues to work on WSL
}; | ||
|
||
patches = [ | ||
(substituteAll { | ||
src = ./hardcode-paths.patch; | ||
inherit crun runc gvisor youki conmon; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should try to limit this to what is useful. I thin kcrun is in almost every case better than runc, so we can drop that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why would we want to limit this - to reduce the number of dependencies?
But, if runc
is obsolete, why would upstream still continue supporting it?
Since upstream continues supporting it, wouldn't that imply that it is valuable to have it as an option?
Also, if we don't want to support runc
, shouldn't we delete it from nixpkgs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why would we want to limit this - to reduce the number of dependencies?
Yeah, we increased the dependencies with this update a lot.
But, if
runc
is obsolete, why would upstream still continue supporting it?
Maybe there are certain usecases when it is useful which are not relevant to nixpkgs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it make sense to make these dependencies (runc
, gvisor
, youki
) optional?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think so. I think we could right now overwrite them with null, but that is a bit dirty.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#310182 does this. I left runc
in by default on Linux, because nixpkgs actually has a test that podman works with that runtime. But, it can now be disabled.
This PR broke darwin support.
|
|
@natsukium Sorry about that, if you're willing to try making a patch, I think this just needs the Linux-only dependencies to be made optional (e.g. with |
Description of changes
Depends on #265409
Things done
nix.conf
? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxed
sandbox = true
nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD"
. Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/
)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.