On 3/6/19 4:55 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > This is not such a small and definitely undesirable overhead. Its purpose is > unclear, it requires manual step and sure enough it will be forgotten. > Moreover it aims at the problem in another package. > It is not runc's job to meet Docker expectations. > Also commit ID is probably useless anyway since we should attempt to always > shipped a tagged (pre-)release. Plus we have patches that make commit ID even > more irrelevant. > > Docker problem should be fixed in Docker. > And clearly it is a Docker's problem to expect a very particular (bundled) > runc (for no good reason), and forever whine into logs about not having > that...
I think applying the patch to runc build as suggested by Shengjing is a good solution for everyone, much better that what I initially proposed. It doesn't involve any git commit, which wouldn't make sense as both of you pointed out, and doesn't add any overhead. The new output for `runc --version` after this patch looks like that: $ /usr/sbin/runc --version runc version 1.0.0~rc6+dfsg1 commit: 1.0.0~rc6+dfsg1-3 spec: 1.0.1 It's a bit hacky to display the debian version on the commit line, but why not. I think it doesn't hurt either. It also prevents to add any patch to docker, as after testing I can confirm that docker doesn't complain anymore, at least for my use-case. Docker is happy enough to have a line such as `commit: 1.0.0~rc6+dfsg1-3` in the output of `runc --version`. Apparently the content of the line doesn't matter, as long as the line is there.
