+mattdm
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017, at 12:35 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 06/27/2017 02:01 PM, Ben Breard wrote:
> > Today we ship a “tools” container that’s *really* large, specifically
> > it’s about 1.5 GB on disk. The feedback I’ve gotten from users is that
> > it's too large to be useful and they tr
On 30/06/17 00:35, Josh Berkus wrote:
> - cli-tools (which, bash-completion, tar, etc.)
Am I the only one not grasping the idea? How is `which` supposed to work
from a container, when the target is in some other container (maybe
unknown one of many containers), or in an image that does not run at
>
> ...
> So, given that this is a concern for upstream, I support breaking up the
> image into logical parts.
>
> Additionally, what about basing each image on RHAtomic Image and/or
> Fedora/CentOS minimal image? That might bring the size down further,
> altough it's possible that the packages in
On 06/27/2017 02:01 PM, Ben Breard wrote:
> Today we ship a “tools” container that’s *really* large, specifically
> it’s about 1.5 GB on disk. The feedback I’ve gotten from users is that
> it's too large to be useful and they try to avoid it. This of course
> makes me sad and I think we should take
Looks like it:
http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2015/09/introducing-the-fedora-tools-image-for-fedora-atomic-host/
https://hub.docker.com/r/centos/tools/
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 06/27/2017 02:01 PM, Ben Breard wrote:
> > Today we ship a “tools” container that’
On 06/27/2017 02:01 PM, Ben Breard wrote:
> Today we ship a “tools” container that’s *really* large, specifically
> it’s about 1.5 GB on disk. The feedback I’ve gotten from users is that
> it's too large to be useful and they try to avoid it. This of course
> makes me sad and I think we should take
