Bug 1314541
| Summary: | Atomic CLI - atomic info command is broken | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Dusty Mabe <dustymabe> |
| Component: | atomic | Assignee: | Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | atomic-bugs <atomic-bugs> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 7.2 | CC: | ajia, bbaude, dustymabe, dwalsh |
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2016-06-23 16:21:30 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Dusty Mabe
2016-03-03 21:11:43 UTC
Someone has hinted to me that there may be compatibility issues with docker-py > 1.4 and docker < 1.9 that may be causing this bug. Asking for info from the interested party. Hey Dusty, This has been fixed upstream with https://github.com/projectatomic/atomic/commit/ff44c6a9496d3b2ba8189170e30ae2e93fee9eb4 . The problem in the current packages is as follows: < docker-1.8 is incompatible with python-docker-py > 1.4 as this will throw a docker/docker-client API error which was being masked by a generic docker error. If you use docker-py-1.4 with docker-1.8 and atomic-1.8, the API error disappears but reveals an import error for a new error class in docker-py called NotFound (within verify.py) This compatibility issue was supposed to be handled via rpm deps but was missed. So, if you choose to use docker-1.8, python-docker-py-1.6+, and atomic upstream master, everything will work. In the above comment, I mean so say, docker-1.9+, python-docker-py-1.6+ and atomic upstream. Fixed in atomic-1.10 I gave a try on RHEL7 system w/ atomic-1.10.5-3.el7.x86_64, docker-1.10.3-40.el7.x86_64 and python-docker-py-1.7.2-1.el7.noarch, atomic info works well. # cat /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.2 (Maipo) # atomic info registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7:latest Image Name: registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7:latest Vendor: Red Hat, Inc. Name: rhel7/rhel Build_Host: rcm-img03.build.eng.bos.redhat.com Version: 7.2 Architecture: x86_64 Release: 61 BZComponent: rhel-server-docker Authoritative_Registry: registry.access.redhat.com But atomic info doesn't work on RHAH 7.2.5, need I file a new bug? or waiting for new rhel-atomic-cloud building. [cloud-user@atomic-host-001 ~]$ sudo atomic info registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7:latest Image Name: registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7:latest time="2016-06-12T09:11:04Z" level=fatal msg="error pinging repository, response code 404" [cloud-user@atomic-host-001 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host release 7.2 [cloud-user@atomic-host-001 ~]$ sudo atomic host status TIMESTAMP (UTC) VERSION ID OSNAME REFSPEC * 2016-06-06 18:12:07 7.2.5 4bf265cf86 rhel-atomic-host rhel-atomic-host-ostree:rhel-atomic-host/7/x86_64/standard 2016-05-06 05:57:30 7.2.4 b060975ce3 rhel-atomic-host rhel-atomic-host-ostree:rhel-atomic-host/7/x86_64/standard [cloud-user@atomic-host-001 ~]$ rpm -q atomic docker python-docker-py atomic-1.10.3-1.el7.x86_64 docker-1.10.3-31.el7.x86_64 python-docker-py-1.7.2-1.el7.noarch NOTE: docker search can find rhel7 in registry.access.redhat.com repo. Does atomic info other non RHEL distributions work? I think the problem might be the lack of support for V2 registries on the Red Hat site. atomic info works well on RHEL7 system, so move the bug to verified status. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016:1273 |