Bug 1757774 - error: Unsupported URI scheme “oci+https”
Summary: error: Unsupported URI scheme “oci+https”
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1851958
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
Classification: Red Hat
Component: flatpak
Version: 8.1
Hardware: x86_64
OS: All
unspecified
high
Target Milestone: rc
: 8.4
Assignee: David King
QA Contact: Desktop QE
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1739559 1757791 1825061
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-10-02 12:15 UTC by Martin Krajnak
Modified: 2020-12-02 17:36 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1757791 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-09-09 13:56:26 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github flatpak flatpak issues 3147 0 None open remote-info error: Unsupported URI scheme “oci+https” 2021-01-20 12:47:11 UTC

Description Martin Krajnak 2019-10-02 12:15:19 UTC
Description of problem:
$ flatpak remote-info OCI org.mozilla.Firefox
error: Unsupported URI scheme “oci+https”


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
flatpak-1.0.6-4.el8.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Add OCI remote
$ flatpak remote-add --user OCI oci+https://registry.fedoraproject.org

2.Send query for info:
$ flatpak remote-info OCI org.mozilla.Firefox

Actual results:
error: Unsupported URI scheme “oci+https”

Expected results:
Command should fetch the info, I am not sure why there is "oci+https" when enabling remote but it has to be there otherwise the remote is not added

$ flatpak remote-add --user fedora https://registry.fedoraproject.org
error: GPG verification enabled, but no summary found (check that the configured URL in remote config is correct)

Additional info:

Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2020-05-27 13:17:07 UTC
Alex points out that this is fixed in https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/commit/cf49bd4ac80404e23ba1d4198706dc3993766c49

Comment 2 David King 2020-05-27 15:53:11 UTC
(In reply to Matthias Clasen from comment #1)
> Alex points out that this is fixed in
> https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/commit/
> cf49bd4ac80404e23ba1d4198706dc3993766c49

Having a quick look at the merge request that this came from (as it seems like the whole series of commits would be required): https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/pull/3597 it seems to depend on parts of the sideload feature, which in turn seems to depend on variant-schema-compiler, neither of which are on the 1.6 branch. Before I go and rebase/backport a load of stuff for just that patch, is that thinking way off? The variant-schema-compiler changes seem OK to workaround, but the sideload changes look a little complicated to me. Any idea, Alex?

Comment 3 Alexander Larsson 2020-06-01 15:05:35 UTC
I think you need essentially:
2028a5323fcf39a40c833f0311f768885d972b21
56f530ca1f18f0b10f31870251d6419be9a98e87
cf49bd4ac80404e23ba1d4198706dc3993766c49

However, these will require quite some changes to backport due to other changes in the codebase. Nothing that is fundamentally hard though, just e.g. doing the same thing with gvariant apis instead of the new apis.

Comment 4 Alexander Larsson 2020-06-17 09:21:38 UTC
I looked at this again, and there is a lot that changed in how transactions work in flatpak 1.8 that make this change work. To work in 1.6 we have to re-implement the feature, which is not impossible, but quite some work. I don't think its worth it at this point and we should rather rebase to 1.8 (out soon) with the fix instead of doing major changes to the old codebase.

Comment 5 Tomas Popela 2020-06-17 15:03:15 UTC
Thank you Alex for the update. We agreed on the SST meeting that we will move this to 8.4 and deal with it as part of the possible flatpak update.

Comment 8 Tomas Popela 2020-09-09 13:56:26 UTC
Closing as a duplicate of bug 1851958 that was created for the Flatpak 1.8 rebase. The fix for this bug will be part of the rebase.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1851958 ***


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