On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 10:47 PM Shengjing Zhu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 9:30 PM Andreas Tille <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Am Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 12:37:11AM +0800 schrieb Shengjing Zhu: > > > > From my naive perspective we most probably want last versions of > > > > containerd and podman anyway and we are early in the release cycle. So > > > > breaking unstable for a limited time span might be tolerable, IMHO. > > > > > > > > > > We only know they will be updated recently since the new versions were > > > just released a few days ago. > > > > I've just read that Ubuntu is doing the sync from unstable tomorrow > > (24.2.). Thus having a working singularity-container version in > > unstable (the current version in unstable is not working) would make > > things easier. I admit I personally do not use Ubuntu - I've just read > > this argument on some other list and it could be some motivation to push > > the move of singularity-container and its preconditions to unstable > > right now. (If it breaks anything we might get input from Ubuntu > > people. ;-P) > > > > appc-cni was uploaded yesterday. > > However, I don't think the singularity-container package can sync to > Ubuntu automatically. > It build-depends containerd and docker.io, which are two packages not > synced between Ubuntu and Debian. > > You can take podman for reference(which also build-depends docker.io), > it needs changes to upload to Ubuntu. > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpod >
And if Canonical really cares singularity-container, they will take the docker.io way to maintain, and not sync from Debian. -- Shengjing Zhu
