On 3/29/19 7:08 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm sure i will embarrass myself for asking this, but i'm confused > about the relationship on my F30 (branched) system between those three > packages. i can see that they are all container runtime packages, but > i get confused when i run commands to try to understand how they > relate to each other, as they clearly(?) represent alternatives for > container runtimes. > > currently, on my system, rpm reports that only containerd.io is > installed: > > $ rpm -q runc > package runc is not installed > $ rpm -q containerd > package containerd is not installed > $ rpm -q containerd.io > containerd.io-1.2.4-3.1.fc29.x86_64 > > however, the man page that works is "man containerd", not "man > containerd.io". > > also, even though rpm suggests that, as packages, containerd.io is > installed and containerd is not, dnf repoquery seems to report the > opposite: > > $ dnf repoquery -l containerd.io > Last metadata expiration check: 0:29:11 ago on Fri 29 Mar 2019 > 06:32:46 AM EDT. > $ > > $ dnf repoquery -l containerd > Last metadata expiration check: 0:30:22 ago on Fri 29 Mar 2019 > 06:32:46 AM EDT. > /etc/containerd > /etc/containerd/config.toml > /usr/bin/containerd > /usr/bin/containerd-shim > /usr/bin/ctr > .... etc etc ... > > finally, while "dnf info runc" reports that there is a runc package, > trying to install unsurprisingly produces: > > $ sudo dnf install runc > ... snip ... > Package containerd.io-1.2.4-3.1.fc29.x86_64 is already installed. > ... etc ... > > so i'm sure there is a relationship involving provides and conflicts > or something of the sort, i'm just confused as to what's happening > here. (if there is a better forum for a question like this, by all > means, let me know.) > > rday > It looks like containerd.io is providing its own version of runc which conflicts with runc. runc is a container runtime (An OCI Container Runtime) to be specific containerd is a container engine, just like Podman, Docker, Moby, Buildah, CRI-O Containerd I believe is packaged incorrectly and should either use the systems runc or imbed its own into a private directory, and should not conflict with runc. I opened a bug on this. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694046 Not sure how this package made it through package review. As for the naming, I have no idea. You shold pobably add your comments on naming to this bugzilla. _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
