Re: [atomic-devel] docs-first RFE for stripping containers

[Clayton Coleman <ccoleman redhat com>]

We definitely want to be able to expose non traditional ways of building containers - like Colin's "ostree style package spec" or stripping things from the container pre publish.


> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:56 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb znmeb net> wrote:
> 
> Thanks!!
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Subhendu Ghosh <sghosh redhat com> wrote:
>> Take a look at the  Openshift build system in Origin. It's implementing that
>> workflow for a local registry.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb znmeb net>
>> Date:02/06/2015 02:42 (GMT+01:00)
>> To: atomic-devel projectatomic io
>> Cc:
>> Subject: Re: [atomic-devel] docs-first RFE for stripping containers
>> 
>> I need / want something like this very badly. My workflow is basically:
>> 
>> 1. Build a development image with all the source, build-time dependencies,
>> etc.
>> 2. Do the builds and export tarballs to my workstation host filesystem
>> or "someplace on the internet".
>> 3. Build an image with the run-time dependencies and tarballs and
>> 'docker push' it to Docker Hub.
>> 
>> *However* - this needs to be *100%* automated / continuously
>> integrated / reproducible from upstream source code to finished Docker
>> Hub image. I'm not there yet. Docker Hub's not there yet. And I have a
>> half-dozen other itches I want to scratch. ;-)
>> 
>> If I had that, the runtime image wouldn't need 'yum' or 'dnf' -
>> run-time Fedora dependencies would be updated and a new image made
>> automagically. I don't know the Docker Hub infrastructure well enough
>> to build this - I'd have to build a host somewhere and hook into a few
>> APIs and do a 'docker push' at the end.
>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Jim Perrin <jperrin centos org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 02/05/2015 01:56 PM, SGhosh wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think you want to go as far as you are suggesting.
>>>> Having the concept of RPMs and dependecy is useful mechanism for being
>>>> able to install apps on top of an existing image, and it is useful if
>>>> you need to apply an emergency fix before rebuilt image can be deployed.
>>> 
>>> I'm viewing this more as a a final optional step in the workflow for
>>> production and deployment, not necessarily for base images.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Cutting down in size is a useful requirement - and getting some upstream
>>>> help for that is needed as well. The latest RPM changes about to hit
>>>> Fedora will include strong/weak dependencies - that can be used to
>>>> remove some deps based on full rms nots being installed. But this is not
>>>> a CentOS 7 item.
>>> 
>>> That sounds interesting. I wouldn't suggest this strictly as a CentOS
>>> thing, but more as an acceptance of containers as a packaging method
>>> itself.
>>> 
>>>> yum does have the excludedocs feature - and utilizing that can reduce
>>>> some of the content - but not all.
>>> 
>>> We do this already, as well as some limited file abuse in the case of
>>> glibc locales. This still leaves a fairly minimal OS container weighing
>>> in at around 150-250MB before the actual applications get installed.
>>> Once everything is built to satisfaction, the admin/dev could simply
>>> strip it and deploy as a final step if needed/desired.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Jim Perrin
>>> The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> OSJourno: Robust Power Tools for Digital Journalists
> http://www.znmeb.mobi/stories/osjourno-robust-power-tools-for-digital-journalists
> 
> Remember, if you're traveling to Bactria, Hump Day is Tuesday and Thursday.
>