Open candrews opened 1 year ago
A friendly reminder that this issue had no activity for 30 days.
This seems reasonable @vrothberg WDYT?
Thanks for reaching out, @candrews !
This seems reasonable @vrothberg WDYT?
Yes, this sounds reasonable. In automation, podman inspect
is the way to go but it seems like useful information when interacting with podman.
@mtrmac WDYT?
Note that the output already contains an image ID (config digest), which uniquely identifies the image. (OTOH it’s not the same thing as the manifest digest — it’s impossible to reconstruct the manifest digest that was pulled from the image ID if there are multiple matches.)
Could we discuss the use case first, please? After the image is pulled, it’s, in a sense, already too late to make any policy decisions; what’s done is done, why does the digest matter? Is this just to have the image identity recorded in logs for purpose of later investigation? The image ID should work for that — in a sense, better, because it deduplicates different representations.
Alternatively, if the goal is to ensure that “the right” digest is pulled, e.g. to consistently deploy exactly the same image to multiple systems, the commands should do just that — decide on a digest, maybe using skopeo inspect
, and then issue a podman pull
across the systems with a digest, not with a tag.
(copy.Image
returns the manifest that was written to c/storage, which almost(?) always allows reporting the digest of the per-arch instance that was pulled. So that could be just printed. Alternatively, c/image might print the digest before starting the pull… by default, or with an opt-in.
But I’m tempted to think that it’s just clutter users don’t actually need at that point. Am I wrong?)
There’s also a question whether we should print the top-level multi-arch manifest digest (identifying what the tag points to), or the per-arch instance manifest digest (identifying which image variant was chosen, e.g. for ARM v6/v7…). Either could be possibly useful, but I don’t think we want both, at least in the default output.
A friendly reminder that this issue had no activity for 30 days.
Since we heard no feedback, I am closing. Reopen if you have feedback.
We don't need any more feedback for this one. I will reopen.
I see it (as the issue described) as a UX improvement (i.e., being much easier to see the digest directly).
Sadly no progress on this one.
Issue Description
docker pull
as provided by Docker outputs the digest of the image pulled. For example:The output of the equivalent podman command is missing this information:
There are other ways to get the digest (such as by using
podman inspect
), but since it's so much easier to get the digest using docker, it would be nice to have parity with docker.Steps to reproduce the issue
Steps to reproduce the issue
podman image pull debian:bullseye
Describe the results you received
Describe the results you expected
podman info output
Podman in a container
No
Privileged Or Rootless
Rootless
Upstream Latest Release
Yes
Additional environment details
Additional information
No response