[lxc-devel] [PATCH] Update Fedora and CentOS templates for common conf includes.

Fri Jan 24 16:27:18 UTC 2014

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:14:36AM -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 10:24 -0500, Dwight Engen wrote: 
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:02:05 -0500
> > "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw at WittsEnd.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 10:35 -0500, Stéphane Graber wrote: 
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 09:29:23AM -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 20:25 -0500, Stéphane Graber wrote: 
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:56:56AM -0500, Michael H. Warfield
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Update Fedora and CentOS templates for common conf includes.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This updates the Fedora and CentOS templates to utilize a
> > > > > > > common included config.  This is largely based on the changes
> > > > > > > in the Oracle template with some exceptions.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Dropping of setpcap (present in the Oracle template) is
> > > > > > > commented out in the Fedora template.  It seems to cause
> > > > > > > problems, such as large login delays with Fedora 20
> > > > > > > containers (but not Fedora 19 - strange).
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The Fedora template is further modified to disable
> > > > > > > systemd-journald.service as it is unnecessary in a container
> > > > > > > and causes serious problems when running in a Fedora 20
> > > > > > > container.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The Fedora template is also updated to default to Fedora 20
> > > > > > > when running on a non-Fedora host.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael H. Warfield <mhw at WittsEnd.com>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Acked-by: Stéphane Graber <stgraber at ubuntu.com>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'll setup builds for CentOS 6.5 on amd64 and i386 and for
> > > > > > Fedora 19 and 20 also on amd64 and i386.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I believe Fedora 20 also supports armhf but that one may need a
> > > > > > bit more work to get going (do you know if your template works
> > > > > > with armhf?).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fedora does support armhf in mainline now.  Previously it was in
> > > > > aux. The template was definitely working with Raspberry Pi armhf
> > > > > with Fedora18.  That was before they created the "Pidora" respin
> > > > > which broke the Fedora template thanks to the name change and
> > > > > some repo changes. Since then, I've also done that distro
> > > > > agnostic bootstrap coding.  I wouldn't be surprised if it was
> > > > > broken, but it should be close.  I'll have to give it a shot on
> > > > > one of my RPi's.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Mike
> > > 
> > > > The image build worked at least, I still need to actually test the
> > > > resulting images to make sure they work though.
> > > 
> > > > Btw, any chance of getting -A working before 1.0 release?
> > > 
> > > Ok, you got it in both the Fedora and CentOS templates.  I just posted
> > > the patch.  I changed it to be "-a" instead of "-A" to correspond with
> > > the options in the Oracle and Ubuntu templates as well.
> > 
> > That reminds me, should we try to consistify which template option
> > specifies the release? Currently we have:
> 
> > alpine:       -R|--release
> > altlinux:     -R|--release
> > arch:
> > busybox:
> > centos:       -R|--release
> > cirros:
> > debian:       -r|--release
> > download:     -r|--release
> > fedora:       -R|--release
> > gentoo:
> > openmandriva: -R|--release
> > opensuse:
> > oracle:       -R|--release
> > plamo:        -r|--release
> > sshd:
> > ubuntu-cloud: -r|--release
> > ubuntu:       -r|--release
> 
> Hmmm...  Looks like 6 votes for "-R" and 5 votes for "-r" with 4
> abstentions (not counting busybox or sshd).
> 
> I'd call that vote too close to call.
> 
> > I don't really care if we go with -R or -r but I think it might be nice
> > if they were all the same. Some of the templates (alpine, archlinux, oracle) are
> > already using -r for other things, while the templates using -r for
> > release don't appear to be using -R for anything so it may be easier to
> > move release to -R.
> 
> I agree that we should standardize on a common set of extended template
> options and stick with them as closely as possible.  That's why I made
> the change from -A to -a in my two.  I'll go along with the rough
> concensus of the group.
> 
> That's interesting that Oracle is using -r for additional user rpms.  I
> would have almost preferred calling it a more generic "packages" (-P ?)
> option that would usable across other distros and formats
> (.rpm, .deb, .apk, .tgz, etc) but that's interesting.  I may look at how
> you have that implemented (doesn't that screw up your cache or do you
> not cache those additional packages?) and consider that for CentOS and
> Fedora.
> 
> Regards,
> Mike

So at least speaking for Ubuntu, changing to -R would be a disaster as
it'll suddenly break dozens of scripts that are calling the template
with the short arguments.

Speaking for lxc-download, switching to -R would be rather odd since
I've taken great care not to use any captitalized parameters,
lxc-download actually only supports 3 short arguments, -d <dist>, -r
<release> and -a <arch>.

-- 
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20140124/fedbb098/attachment.pgp>