Bug 1361677 - Upgrades force docker 1.10 update
Summary: Upgrades force docker 1.10 update
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Cluster Version Operator
Version: 3.2.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 3.3.1
Assignee: Devan Goodwin
QA Contact: Anping Li
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-07-29 17:38 UTC by Eric Rich
Modified: 2020-06-11 12:56 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Cause: Incorrect logic interpreting inventory variables that control the version of docker to configure. Consequence: It was not possible to upgrade OpenShift and stay on docker < 1.10. Fix: Upgrade now respects docker_version and docker_upgrade inventory variables. Result: Users can now upgrade and control the version of docker to be installed more explicitly.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-10-27 16:12:39 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2016:2122 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE OpenShift Container Platform atomic-openshift-utils bug fix update 2016-10-27 20:11:30 UTC

Description Eric Rich 2016-07-29 17:38:47 UTC
Description of problem:

Upgrades for the use of docker 1.10 even thought docker 1.9 is supported. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 3.1 > 3.2

How reproducible: 100% 

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Run upgrade script and set docker_upgrade=false

Actual results:

Upgrade fails because the upgrade script requires docker 1.10 

Expected results:

Upgrade should happen and not update docker to 1.10 

Additional info:

  - fail:
      msg: This playbook requires access to Docker 1.10 or later
    when: g_docker_version.avail_version | default(g_docker_version.curr_version, true) | version_compare('1.10','<')

Comment 1 Ryan Howe 2016-07-29 18:28:32 UTC
This PR should resolve this bug. 

https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/1945

Comment 2 Eric Rich 2016-08-02 14:59:14 UTC
The usage of "docker_version=1.9.1" in the host file also does not seem to help with this.

Comment 3 Scott Dodson 2016-08-02 15:13:29 UTC
Can you check the version of the installer in use? This is believed to be fixed in the latest version of the 3.2 installer.

Comment 4 Eric Rich 2016-08-03 13:28:36 UTC
(In reply to Scott Dodson from comment #3)
> Can you check the version of the installer in use? This is believed to be
> fixed in the latest version of the 3.2 installer.

atomic-openshift-utils-3.2.13-1.git.0.0afa976.el7.noarch

Comment 5 Scott Dodson 2016-08-12 16:55:21 UTC
Fixed in https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/2285

Comment 6 Scott Dodson 2016-08-12 17:36:27 UTC
Nevermind, not fixed.

Comment 7 Devan Goodwin 2016-08-15 13:05:21 UTC
Fixed in https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/2295, you can now override this requirement with either docker_version or docker_upgrade.

Comment 9 Anping Li 2016-10-08 01:57:15 UTC
Can't install openshift-ansible-playbooks-3.3.30

[root@qe-upgrade-working host1]# dnf install atomic-openshift-utils
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:02:03 ago on Sat Oct  8 01:49:35 2016.
Error: nothing provides openshift-ansible-callback-plugins = 3.3.30 needed by openshift-ansible-playbooks-3.3.30-1.git.0.b260e04.el7.noarch
(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages)

Comment 11 Anping Li 2016-10-13 01:38:12 UTC
Blocked by https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1383189

Comment 12 Anping Li 2016-10-14 05:56:55 UTC
docker_version still 1.9.1 after upgrade when We enabled docker-upgrade=false

Comment 14 errata-xmlrpc 2016-10-27 16:12:39 UTC
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-2016:2122


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.