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

Sat Jan 25 01:38:14 UTC 2014

On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 11:27 -0500, Stéphane Graber wrote: 
> 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.

Same might be said of the other camp, although I personally don't have
any.

> 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>.

I'm certainly not married to a convention of all lower case options but
I'm not opposed either.  Cast that into a BCP and recommend that
template writers / maintainers strive to follow it.  Reserve those
options for those purposes.

All discussion aside, this is something that should be decided and
established as "the" convention.  If it's "-r", so be it.  Someone needs
to decide this.  Who gets to make that executive decision?  I will
follow.

I may be sticking my nose in deeper into the opensuse template after
some chatting with Fredric (who is no longer maintaining the opensuse
template) and his coworker Thorsten.  This is relevant to that
endeavour, since the opensuse template is deficient in that area as
well.  I can code it either way and it's a trivial change either way
since that template isn't currently using either option.

Regards,
Mike
-- 
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 978-7061 |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
   /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (678) 463-0932 |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
   NIC whois: MHW9          | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0x674627FF        | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 465 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20140124/770d8b96/attachment.pgp>