containers
`toolbox run` does not return status of the command
Describe the bug
toolbox run does not return the status of the executed command, it always returns status 0 regardless of the actual status of the command. Thus, toolbox is a great tool for interactive work, but it is hardly usable in scripts. For example, if I run make in a container (e. g. toolbox run make), the caller script can't easily know if the build was successful or failed. To find out build status I have to implement various workarounds.
Steps how to reproduce the behaviour
toolbox create
toolbox run true; echo $?
toolbox run false; echo $?
toolbox run /bin/bash -c "exit 33"; echo $?
Actual behaviour
$ toolbox run true; echo $?
0
$ toolbox run false; echo $?
0
$ toolbox run /bin/bash -c "exit 33"; echo $?
0
Note: toolbox status is always 0, regardless of the status of the executed command.
Expected behaviour
$ toolbox run true; echo $?
0
$ toolbox run false; echo $?
1
$ toolbox run /bin/bash -c "exit 33"; echo $?
33
Output of toolbox --version (v0.0.90+)
$ toolbox --version
toolbox version 0.0.97
Toolbox package info (rpm -q toolbox)
$ rpm -q toolbox
toolbox-0.0.97-1.fc33.x86_64
Output of podman version
$ podman --version
podman version 2.2.1
Podman package info (rpm -q podman)
$ rpm -q podman
podman-2.2.1-1.fc33.x86_64
Info about your OS
$ cat /etc/system-release
Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three)
$ uname -a
Linux antec 5.8.18-300.fc33.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Nov 2 19:09:05 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Additional context
podman exec does return the status of the executed command:
$ podman exec fedora-toolbox-33 true; echo $?
0
$ podman exec fedora-toolbox-33 false; echo $?
1
$ podman exec fedora-toolbox-33 /bin/bash -c "exit 33"; echo $?
33
fedora-toolbox-33 is the container created by toolbox. So, both container and podman work perfectly, but toolbox does not.
You'd think, y'know, a tool specifically intended for automation and perhaps CI/CD would have this basic feature of telling the user "oh, this step in the build failed" — a feature that has existed since PC-DOS.
You'd be wrong. :face_exhaling:
@Rudd-O, please refrain from posting unconstructive criticism. I understand you frustration as a lot of software I personally use lacks some capabilities. There is a PR that solves the issue that I'd like to merge soon (#1013).
