You are not logged in.

#1 2020-03-01 13:36:03

archdom
Member
Registered: 2018-09-12
Posts: 96

[SOLVED]Archlinux docker image to a date

I'm trying to create an archlinux docker image from January 19, 2019.
Everything is fine except the systemd-libs package.
Now I'll explain:

1 Step

I cloned the arch repository from github.
https://github.com/archlinux/archlinux-docker

2 Step

I put it in the mirrorlist file
Server = https://archive.archlinux.org/repos/2019/01/19/$repo/os/$arch

3 Step

In the makefile I modified the following value
from DOCKER_IMAGE: = base
to DOCKER_IMAGE: = base-19-01-2019

4 Step

I run as root
make docker-image

The image "archlinux/base-19-01-2019" is correctly created.

This is my Dockerfile:

FROM archlinux/base-19-01-2019

USER root
RUN echo "root: root" | chpasswd

#Force downgrade
RUN pacman -Syyuu --noconfirm
.....
...
...

Among all the packages that will be downgraded there is also systemd

                                                                                      
warning: systemd: downgrading from version 244.3-1 to version 240.34-3
                                                                                      
downgrading systemd ...
systemd-sysusers: /usr/lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.30 'not found (required by /usr/lib/libudev.so.1)
journalctl: /usr/lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.30 'not found (required by /usr/lib/libudev.so.1)

                                                                                     

This file /usr/lib/libudev.so.1  is from the systemd-libs package.

When I run the container I see this:

local / systemd 240.34-3 (base-devel)
    system and service manager
local / systemd-libs 244.3-1
    systemd client libraries

Why isn't systemd-libs downgraded?
Systemd-libs has an incorrect version. it should be from 244.3-1 to 240.34-3
Thank you all

Last edited by archdom (2020-03-01 19:19:28)

Offline

#2 2020-03-01 15:52:22

archdom
Member
Registered: 2018-09-12
Posts: 96

Re: [SOLVED]Archlinux docker image to a date

guys, I found the problem.

On the archive server for January 19th 2019
the systemd-libs package is not present.

As a result pacman does not downgrade.

I did the test by downgrading to 15/02/2019 and it worked.
On this day the systemd-libs package is present.
This is a problem.
Where are these bugs reported?

Offline

#3 2020-03-01 15:54:27

archdom
Member
Registered: 2018-09-12
Posts: 96

Re: [SOLVED]Archlinux docker image to a date

now, it work.
In the docker container, i see

local/systemd 240.95-2 (base-devel)
    system and service manager
local/systemd-libs 240.95-2
    systemd client libraries

both same version

Offline

#4 2020-03-01 16:11:49

eschwartz
Fellow
Registered: 2014-08-08
Posts: 4,097

Re: [SOLVED]Archlinux docker image to a date

Because that was a month before "libsystemd" was renamed to "systemd-libs". But it still provides the libsystemd dependency as a backwards-compat thing, so systemd was able to be downgraded.

Question: why do you need an ancient image from that long ago? Why don't you create a new image based on today, and if you need to, freeze it?

EDIT: okay, name rings a bell, you're this person: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 3#p1889913

So... I still think this could be done better by using a current version of arch, and a custom/AUR package for the legacy mariadb version.

Last edited by eschwartz (2020-03-01 16:38:18)


Managing AUR repos The Right Way -- aurpublish (now a standalone tool)

Offline

#5 2020-03-01 19:18:59

archdom
Member
Registered: 2018-09-12
Posts: 96

Re: [SOLVED]Archlinux docker image to a date

eschwartz wrote:

Because that was a month before "libsystemd" was renamed to "systemd-libs". But it still provides the libsystemd dependency as a backwards-compat thing, so systemd was able to be downgraded.

Question: why do you need an ancient image from that long ago? Why don't you create a new image based on today, and if you need to, freeze it?

EDIT: okay, name rings a bell, you're this person: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 3#p1889913

So... I still think this could be done better by using a current version of arch, and a custom/AUR package for the legacy mariadb version.

this was the problem ..... smile
I will think of the solution that you have proposed to me.
Thanks so much

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB