Ubuntu LTS Download Issue

[omercngiz]

Is this a docs issue?

• My issue is about the documentation content or website

Type of issue

Information is incorrect

Description

In this section:

Install using the apt repository

# Add Docker's official GPG key:
sudo apt update
sudo apt install ca-certificates curl
sudo install -m 0755 -d /etc/apt/keyrings
sudo curl -fsSL https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu/gpg -o /etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc
sudo chmod a+r /etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc

# Add the repository to Apt sources:
sudo tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/docker.sources <<EOF
Types: deb
URIs: https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu
Suites: $(. /etc/os-release && echo "${UBUNTU_CODENAME:-$VERSION_CODENAME}")
Components: stable
Signed-By: /etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc
EOF

sudo apt update

I get this error:

N: The configured 'stable/binary-i386/Packages' file cannot be retrieved because the 'https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu noble InRelease' repository does not support the 'i386' architecture.

Location

https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/ubuntu/

Suggestion

Adding 1 line to the end solved it for me:

# Add the repository to Apt sources:
sudo tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/docker.sources <<EOF
Types: deb
URIs: https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu
Suites: $(. /etc/os-release && echo "${UBUNTU_CODENAME:-$VERSION_CODENAME}")
Components: stable
Architecture: amd64 # This line solved the problem.
Signed-By: /etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc

[dvdksn]

What distro are you using? It's not vanilla ubuntu is it?

[omercngiz]

❯ cat /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 24.04.4 LTS"
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION_ID="24.04"
VERSION="24.04.4 LTS (Noble Numbat)"
VERSION_CODENAME=noble
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"
PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"
UBUNTU_CODENAME=noble
LOGO=ubuntu-logo

❯ uname -a
Linux ubuntu 6.17.0-19-generic #19~24.04.2-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Fri Mar  6 23:08:46 UTC 2 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[dvdksn]

@thaJeztah wdyt about changing $(. /etc/os-release ... to maybe $(dpkg --print-architecture) here?

[thaJeztah]

repository does not support the 'i386' architecture.

i386 is 32-bit? We don't have packages for that; is the system running bare-metal? Somehow installed with a 32-bit user land?

[dvdksn]

uname -a says 64 bit though - maybe they changed it at some point to play steam games or whatever?

[thaJeztah]

Adding an explicit Architecture to that list seems sane to me; at least I think that's what we used with the old format?

(which reminds me that we probably should update the get.docker.com script to use the new format as well)

[omercngiz]

❯ dpkg --print-architecture
amd64

Is the system running bare-metal?
Yes

Maybe they changed it at some point to play steam games or whatever?
Yes, i use steam

[tianon]

FWIW, adding:

Architecture: $(dpkg --print-architecture)

to this block is sane IMO, and consistent with several other places where we already do the same thing:

• docs/content/manuals/ai/model-runner/examples.md

  Line 78 in 8c5f75f

  "deb [arch=$(dpkg --print-architecture) signed-by=/etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc] https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu \

• docs/content/manuals/engine/install/raspberry-pi-os.md

  Line 149 in 8c5f75f

  "deb [arch=$(dpkg --print-architecture) signed-by=/etc/apt/keyrings/docker.asc] {{% param "download-url-base" %}} \

[tianon]

An alternative solution (that's perhaps worth considering) would be adding an empty i386 suite to the package repository, which is a very normal way to handle this (but does look a little odd for folks looking at the metadata).