[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [atomic-devel] should /etc/os-release mention atomic?

There are many fields in os-release. Indeed most should match RHEL ==
RHEL Atomic, but there should be a standard simple way to use the
/etc/os-release API to get the precise, coherent, well-known,
delivered-as-a-unit operating system version that is running on the system.

This is what Jonathan is working on, and this goal doesn't conflict with
showing the same fields as RHEL (or Fedora or CentOS) in /etc/os-release
for most things.


On 28.07.2016 17:25, Daniel Riek wrote:
> FWIW: I think the logic on the RHEL side was that we don't want to make
> it look different - it's a different deployment format of the same OS...
> D.
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Stephen Milner <smilner redhat com
> <mailto:smilner redhat com>> wrote:
>     On Jul 28, 2016 10:48 AM, "Waldemar Augustyn" <waldemar astyn com
>     <mailto:waldemar astyn com>> wrote:
>     >
>     > It's a minor point but I wonder if /etc/os-release should mention
>     atomic
>     > somewhere.  It's a different OS from centos/fedora listed now.  Right
>     > now I am checking rpm-ostree to tell atomic from standard
>     centos/fedora.
>     >
>     Agreed. I believe that Jonathan Lebon is already working on adding
>     it in.
>     --
>     Thanks,
>     Steve
> -- 
> Daniel Riek <riek redhat com <mailto:riek redhat com>>
> * Sr. Director Systems Design & Engineering 
> * Red Hat Inc, Tel. +1-617-863-6776

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]