Clarify definition of --pull options #5407
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: rhatdan The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
rhatdan
force-pushed
the
pull
branch
4 times, most recently
from
efc0397
to
c584795
Compare
rhatdan
force-pushed
the
pull
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c2bcd22
to
08b1e2f
Compare
openshift-merge-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
| - **always**: Always pull the image and throw an error if the pull fails. | ||
| - **missing**: Pull the image only when the image is not in the local containers storage. Throw an error if no image is found and the pull fails. | ||
| - **never**: Never pull the image but use the one from the local containers storage. Throw an error if no image is found. | ||
| - **newer**: Pull if the image on the registry is newer than the one in the local containers storage. An image is considered to be newer when the digests are different. Comparing the time stamps is prone to errors. Pull errors are suppressed if a local image was found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this doesn't specify what happens with true or false, does it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No we want to hide those, since we do not want people using them any longer. Just use the newer terminology so it is consistent with Podman.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This drops all mention of SBOM scanner images.
|
rebase needed. I think similar changes are needed to buildah-commit.1.md |
openshift-merge-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
|
Ephemeral COPR build failed. @containers/packit-build please check. |
|
@TomSweeneyRedHat since buildah commit is pulling SBOM Scanner image, I will leave this to @nalind to decide, lets get this merged so that standard images work in the same was as podman. |
|
@rhatdan all kinds or red test unhappiness here. |
rhatdan
force-pushed
the
pull
branch
2 times, most recently
from
56fe1c0
to
2d57606
Compare
Use github.com/containers/common/pkg/config for handling pull policy. No longer document --pull=true|false Fixes: containers#5406 Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
| // registry if a local copy of it is not already present. | ||
| PullNever = define.PullNever | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
| "always": PullAlways, | ||
| "never": PullNever, | ||
| "ifnewer": PullIfNewer, | ||
| } |
| @@ -120,7 +121,7 @@ type BuildOptions struct { | |||
| ContextDirectory string | |||
| // PullPolicy controls whether or not we pull images. It should be one | |||
| // of PullIfMissing, PullAlways, PullIfNewer, or PullNever. | |||
| PullPolicy PullPolicy | |||
| PullPolicy config.PullPolicy | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This changes the default (unset) value from PullIfMissing to config.PullPolicyAlways.
| always: pull images even if the named images are present in store, | ||
| missing: pull images if the named images are not present in store, | ||
| never: only use images present in store if available, | ||
| newer: pull if the image on the registry is newer than the in store`) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Possibly this should be ifnewer and not newer? Related PR that fixes the docs.
Fixes: #5406
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
How to verify it
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?