Files
mesh-host/internal
jschoubben f04294c3c1 A service can be enabled at boot, and a container uses the runtime the machine has
Two gaps found by testing podman rather than reasoning about it.

The service shape could not say "starts at boot". It ran `systemctl start`, so
`service: docker.service, running` started docker now and it would not come
back after a reboot unless something else had enabled it. A declaration that
reports success and stops being true at the next power cut.

`boot: enabled|disabled` is now a separate field, not a fourth value of
`state`, because the two are orthogonal: a unit can be enabled and stopped (it
returns at boot) or disabled and running (started by hand, gone after one).
Absent means the host asserts nothing, so a machine whose operator enabled
something is not silently disabled by a declaration that never mentioned it.

Boot state is made true BEFORE the unit is started. When an apply fails part
way, enabled-and-stopped comes back at the next boot and running-and-disabled
does not, so the more durable half goes first.

`is-enabled` has the same trap as `is-active` had. Its exit code is non-zero
for nearly everything, and `static` is neither enabled nor disabled -- the unit
has no install section and CANNOT be enabled. Reading it as "disabled" would
have the host try, fail, and blame the wrong thing, which is the same shape as
reading a missing unit as "stopped".

The container applier no longer calls `docker` literally. Verified on this
machine against podman 6.1.0:

  docker info --format '{{.ServerVersion}}'    -> 29.7.2
  podman info --format '{{.ServerVersion}}'    -> Error: can't evaluate field
                                                  ServerVersion
  podman info --format '{{.Version.Version}}'  -> 6.1.0

So one probe cannot find both, and a host using docker's would report a machine
running podman as having no container runtime at all. Everything else IS
compatible -- run, rm -f, and docker's own Go template syntax for reading state
and labels all work unchanged on podman, confirmed by running them. That is why
this is a two-entry lookup rather than an interface: only the probe differs.

Detected rather than declared, because adoption keeps what the machine already
has (research 012), which hardcoding one runtime contradicts.

A machine with neither now says so, naming both: "docker: command not found" on
a machine deliberately running podman sends the reader after the wrong thing.

Verified end to end against real docker (container created, running, labelled)
and against an empty PATH (refused, naming both runtimes).

Two injections per behaviour, all confirmed to bite. One injection produced a
build failure that my check read as "no bite" for the third time, so the check
now distinguishes them.
2026-08-27 23:58:44 +02:00
..