> > The general consensus is to create a separate "utility" container which > contains DNF and other similar tools (e.g., rhel tools). >
I'm a bit confused, how does this help folks who are trying to build their own containers from a Fedora base Docker image? Containers to build containers? Use the utility as the base? On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccole...@redhat.com> wrote: > Yup, absolutely. Slimming down where we can is great - but I don't > want people to get a bad impression with the core fedora image for > sure. > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Josh Berkus <jber...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 02/10/2016 12:42 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote: > >> > >> Removing dnf would break most people who depend on fedora base images, > >> since installing new packages is the reason people depend on the > >> fedora base image. Creating a fedora base image would dnf is > >> interesting as a side project (fedora-minimal?) but I doubt would ever > >> see wide use in the community, because it would double or triple the > >> amount of work someone has to do to actually use the image. It would > >> appear to the user as if the fedora image is broken with very little > >> explanation, and not fit the common use people have for OS base > >> images. > > > > > > Well, we can do without DNF and RPM for OStree-built images, no? > > > > -- > > -- > > Josh Berkus > > Project Atomic > > Red Hat OSAS > >
