Skip to content
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

"skopeo copy" uses cached layer of different size, causing change in digest #1097

Closed
thomasmckay opened this issue Nov 4, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1520
Closed

"skopeo copy" uses cached layer of different size, causing change in digest #1097

thomasmckay opened this issue Nov 4, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1520

Comments

@thomasmckay
Copy link
Contributor

Performing a skopeo copy --all docker://from:tag docker://to:tag resulted in a change of digest. After removing ~/.local/share/containers/cache/blob-info-cache-v1.boltdb the copy maintained digest as expected.
skopeo version 1.2.0
fedora32

@mtrmac
Copy link
Contributor

mtrmac commented Nov 5, 2020

Thanks for your report.

To be explicit, this is intentional behavior; when Skopeo can obtain an “equivalent” representation of the same image based on data that is already present at the destination, and there is nothing to indicate that the specific representation matters (i.e. the destination is not a digested reference, and the image is neither signed nor being signed), the copy implementation prefers quick metadata operations to copying / duplicating large amounts of data.

But for callers that do care about the representation (notably OpenShift which does not always use signatures but records digests separately), it may well make sense to provide an option (especially for skopeo sync) to opt in to preserving digests if at all possible, or maybe to option to always preserving digests (or failing if that can’t be done).

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 4, 2021

A friendly reminder that this issue had no activity for 30 days.

@Jamstah
Copy link
Contributor

Jamstah commented Dec 3, 2021

This should be closed by #1520

@mtrmac mtrmac linked a pull request Dec 3, 2021 that will close this issue
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 18, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants