Well we got to figure out how/if upstart can run in a non-privileged
container. but yes.

rhel7-init or rhel7-system

rhel6-init or rhel6-system

Perhaps


On 10/21/2016 12:42 PM, Daniel Riek wrote:
>
> We will need the same for rhel6 (with upstart). We should think about
> a consistent naming model.
>
> D.
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 12:38 PM, "Mrunal Patel" <mpa...@redhat.com
> <mailto:mpa...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Daniel J Walsh <dwa...@redhat.com
>     <mailto:dwa...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>         That might make the most sense.
>
>         RHEL7 == Base Image
>
>         RHEL7Systemd == BaseImage + Config to run systemd as pid1.
>
>     +1, maybe call it RHEL7-system image?  
>
>
>
>
>         On 10/21/2016 12:26 PM, Daniel Riek wrote:
>>         Question: should we separate a true minimal base image that
>>         as default run's a shell and the default iamge that runs
>>         systemd and behaves more like a linux system?
>>
>>         On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Clayton Coleman
>>         <ccole...@redhat.com <mailto:ccole...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             This seems like a breaking API change (as you note) for
>>             downstream
>>             consumers.  Seems more correct to create a new image for
>>             that.
>>
>>             > On Oct 21, 2016, at 11:50 AM, Daniel J Walsh
>>             <dwa...@redhat.com <mailto:dwa...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>             >
>>             > If we make this change, we would want to do it in
>>             Fedora and Centos also.
>>             >
>>             > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387282
>>             <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387282>
>>             >
>>             > The benefits of making this change are that people new
>>             to containers
>>             > could follow a simple workflow similar to what the do
>>             on the OS, where
>>             > all they need to do is install an rpm service and
>>             enable and it is ready
>>             > to go.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > # cat Dockerfile
>>             >
>>             > FROM rhel7
>>             >
>>             > RUN dnf -y install httpd; systemctl enabled httpd
>>             >
>>             > ADD MYAPP /
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > # docker build -t MYAPP .
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > And they are done.  Now if they run their container
>>             >
>>             > docker run -d MYAPP
>>             >
>>             > And their app runs with systemd/journald and httpd with
>>             their app runnin
>>             > inside of it.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > For users who don't want to use systemd, they would
>>             just override the
>>             > CMD field and their container would work fine.
>>             >
>>             > Since the current default is bash, they would need to
>>             do this anyways.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > A couple of things will break,
>>             >
>>             > docker run -ti rhel7
>>             >
>>             > Currently runs a shell.  With the new change, systemd
>>             would start up
>>             > inside of the contaienr.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > Users who want a shell would need to execute
>>             >
>>             > docker run -ti rhel7 /bin/sh
>>             >
>>             > (I always do this anyways, but I guess some people do not)
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > The other big issue is on stopping of containers.
>>             docker stop currently
>>             > defaults to sending SIGTERM to the pid 1 of the container.
>>             >
>>             > systemd requires that SIGRTMIN+3 be sent to it to close
>>             down properly.
>>             > If we want to have systemd work by default, we would
>>             >
>>             > need to change the default SIGSTOP of the base image. 
>>             This means any
>>             > application based on the base image that does not
>>             >
>>             > override the SIGSTOP would get SIGRTMIN+3.  Most apps
>>             will die when they
>>             > get this signal, but if the App had a signal handler for
>>             >
>>             > SIGTERM, the signal handler will not work correctly.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             > Adding
>>             >
>>             > SIGSTOP SIGTERM
>>             >
>>             > to a Dockerfile would fix the issue, but it will cause
>>             unexpected
>>             > breakage.  I don't see an easy solution for this.
>>             >
>>             >
>>             >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         -- 
>>         Daniel Riek <r...@redhat.com <mailto:r...@redhat.com>>
>>         * Sr. Director Systems Design & Engineering 
>>         * Red Hat Inc, Tel. +1-617-863-6776 <tel:%2B1-617-863-6776>
>
>

Reply via email to