|
On 03/25/2015 07:36 AM, Matt Micene
wrote:
I'll agree with Jeremy here, we should work on the
container spec first and publishing second.
I'd be good with a Dockerfile and a guide how to run
it as a starting point and that could be modified for each
distribution to publish in their particular idiom
+1. Without dockerfile an image is not helpful for collaboration.
-Lala
-Matt M
Brevity and typos result of tiny keyboard and giant
thumbs
On Mar 24, 2015 8:41 PM, "Jeremy Eder"
< jeder redhat com>
wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Karanbir Singh" <mail-lists karan org>
> To: atomic-devel projectatomic io
> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 5:08:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [atomic-devel] Tools container for Fedora
and CentOS
>
> On 24/03/15 15:37, Jeremy Eder wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Jason Brooks" <jbrooks redhat com>
> >> To: "Lalatendu Mohanty" <lmohanty redhat com>
> >> Cc: atomic-devel projectatomic io
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:29:40 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [atomic-devel] Tools container for
Fedora and CentOS
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Lalatendu Mohanty" <lmohanty redhat com>
> >>> To: atomic-devel projectatomic io
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 8:18:51 AM
> >>> Subject: [atomic-devel] Tools container for
Fedora and CentOS
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> What are our plans for including a similar
docker SPC container as
> >>> rhel-tools[1] for Fedora and CentOS? As
discussed with some of you on
> >>> #atomic , it definitely doable for fedora
and CentOS. However I am not
> >>> sure where we are with this.
> >>
> >> We should do it. Is there a Dockerfile publicly
available?
> >
> > We should definitely do it. I've already made my
opinion known on that
> > internally ;)
> >
> > Anyway I believe it's our plan to get this all out
once the build tooling
> > is there in centos and fedora to build these
"official-ish" images. In
> > the interim, I pushed this last year that's kinda
sorta near rhel-tools
> > but has no support for the atomic command, the
package list is slightly
> > different etc etc:
> >
> > https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/jeremyeder/c7perf/dockerfile/
> >
> > # docker pull jeremyeder/c7perf
> >
> >
>
>
> we can overload the /u/centos at index.docker.io for these sort of
> containers. maybe this doesnt merit a /_/centos instance
>
> would that work ?
Can you help me understand the distinction ? I don't know
what the different URLs mean.
Ultimately my desire is that we end up with public tools
images for fedora and centos, and my understanding is that
Langdon will re-initiate that request internally.
|