Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> writes:
> On 3/10/21 2:27 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >> >> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> >>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 10:44, Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> And then I get the same failure as you. Can you confirm the docker >>>> version you have now? >>> >>> e104462:bionic:qemu$ docker version >>> Client: >>> Version: 18.09.1 >>> API version: 1.39 >>> Go version: go1.10.6 >>> Git commit: 4c52b90 >>> Built: Wed Jan 9 19:35:23 2019 >>> OS/Arch: linux/amd64 >>> Experimental: false >>> >>> Server: Docker Engine - Community >>> Engine: >>> Version: 18.09.1 >>> API version: 1.39 (minimum version 1.12) >>> Go version: go1.10.6 >>> Git commit: 4c52b90 >>> Built: Wed Jan 9 19:02:44 2019 >>> OS/Arch: linux/amd64 >>> Experimental: false >> >> I swapped out the snap docker for the docker.io package from the >> repository but it's still a newer version than yours: >> >> 13:25 alex@bionic/x86_64 [user.static/testing/next] >docker version >> Client: >> Version: 19.03.6 >> API version: 1.40 >> Go version: go1.12.17 >> Git commit: 369ce74a3c >> Built: Fri Dec 18 12:21:44 2020 >> OS/Arch: linux/amd64 >> Experimental: false >> >> Server: >> Engine: >> Version: 19.03.6 >> API version: 1.40 (minimum version 1.12) >> Go version: go1.12.17 >> Git commit: 369ce74a3c >> Built: Thu Dec 10 13:23:49 2020 >> OS/Arch: linux/amd64 >> Experimental: false >> containerd: >> Version: 1.3.3-0ubuntu1~18.04.4 >> GitCommit: >> runc: >> Version: spec: 1.0.1-dev >> GitCommit: >> docker-init: >> Version: 0.18.0 >> GitCommit: >> >> So I guess somehow we've regressed something that doesn't work on the >> older version on your system. I can't recreate anything like your >> failure unless I switch to the snap version (which I think is related to >> visibility of file-systems from the snap) so perhaps we just need to >> detect that somehow and disable docker support? > > Why is Peter's Docker trying to rebuild the downloaded image? > Is it something the docker.py script is doing (like final step) > that invalidate the cache? > > Peter, just to remove one variable from the equation, your system > RTC is correct? > > Alex, why not simply remove the 2 Hexagon patches from your pullreq > until we figure this out? Yeah I'm going to drop them for now. I think we need to: - ensure re-builds aren't triggered normally when they should be cached - I think this means the hexagon build should be standalone - possible also properly split using multi-stage builds - upload a NOUSER variant of the build (--add-user should be a local change) - detect snap versions of docker? > > Phil. -- Alex Bennée