containers
arch-toolbox image has 'VERSION_ID=TEMPLATE_VERSION_ID' in os-release(5)
Describe the bug
The new Toolbx image for Arch Linux has VERSION_ID=TEMPLATE_VERSION_ID in os-release(5). This is a bit odd, and isn't present on Arch hosts.
Steps how to reproduce the behaviour
podman run --rm quay.io/toolbx-images/archlinux-toolbox:latest cat /etc/os-release
/cc @Foxboron
Weird!
I assume something has broken here https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/archlinux-docker/-/blob/master/Dockerfile.template#L27
Should be fixed in future builds of the image, which should be daily.
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/archlinux-docker/-/commit/74dc761af835b7fe091db387c5cdca472813dc6c
I just created a container with the latest image on the registry and it has VERSION_ID=20230611.0.157136 instead of the weird VERSION_ID=TEMPLATE_VERSION_ID:
$ cat /etc/os-release
NAME="Arch Linux"
PRETTY_NAME="Arch Linux"
ID=arch
BUILD_ID=rolling
VERSION_ID=20230611.0.157136
However, I remember that Arch Linux hosts don't have any VERSION_ID at all - only BUILD_ID. Isn't it odd for the OCI images to have it? Or is this a new change?
Not super odd really.
Fedora Rawhide and OpenSUSE Tumbleweed also do this with their container images. And part of the idea is to have an indicator when it was built.
I don't think Fedora Rawhide does that:
$ podman run --rm registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:39 cat /etc/os-release
NAME="Fedora Linux"
VERSION="39 (Container Image Prerelease)"
ID=fedora
VERSION_ID=39
...
The manual says: To summarize: ... if updates eventually completely replace previously installed contents, as in a typical binary distribution, VERSION_ID should be used to identify major releases of the operating system. BUILD_ID may be used instead or in addition to VERSION_ID when the original system image version is important.
It makes me think that Arch Linux should have had:
BUILD_ID=20230611.0.157136
VERSION_ID=rolling
... and not the other way round.
Anyway, it's alright. I was mostly curious. It's fine if it's really meant to be this way.
It might be useful if we could record when the Toolbx image was built somewhere in os-release(5). We don't have a clear use-case for it now, so let's not worry about it. :)