On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> RPM-OSTree is functionally irrelevant in this discussion, Changing how we handle the kernel is certainly relevant. > since it has > its own behavior patterns and eschews compatibility with the greater > ecosystem anyway. I don't think that's a fair characterization, we obviously go to a fair amount of effort to support some of the existing ecosystem, but achieving the goals conflicts with 100% compatibility. > It doesn't even support modules, We will at some point: https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/1435 In practice today for people doing custom builds on the server side we usually want more sophistication than the default module UX anyways (e.g. we just added lockfiles: https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/pull/1745 ), or we just want the latest (what the current git master does). > so this whole discussion doesn't even matter for systems built on RPM-OSTree. Not at all! We expect and encourage people to use dnf and modules inside containers. At some point later we will probably add some support on the host for layering but I think it's more important to flesh out the toolbox approach for living inside a container. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
