On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:06:18PM -0300, Vitor Lobo wrote: > As a user of the Docker, I would like to discuss a better offer to the > Anaconda installer (inside the atomic project). Well, the anaconda project > is very interesting for both servers, and to desktop ' s. However, in the > case of server Docker, seem somewhat "unnecessary" the idea of manipulating > graphics and practical complexity and partitioning of anaconda.
So, here's why I've been pushing for and will continue to push for using Anaconda for all of our OS-image-creation needs. When I started working on Fedora Cloud, there were at least _four_ different tools for creating cloud images. Each one worked differently, and, crucially, each one resulted in a slightly different installed system. As a practical result, the Fedora cloud image at the time actually ended up having a number of very serious bugs which didn't apply to the distro as a whole and which no one noticed. Having one common tool which includes all of the shared knowledge for creating images will prevent this from happening in the future. Is there any actual _harm_ in Anaconda's ability to also deal with disk partitioning and other hardware details? There might be a problem if the Anaconda team only had the bare-metal OS install usecase as a priority and we were bending the tool to some secondary purpose, but as I understand from the Anaconda folks, that's definitely not the case. -- Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/> Fedora Project Leader mat...@fedoraproject.org <http://fedoraproject.org/>
