[CentOS-devel] how minimal is a minimal too minimal

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Wed Mar 19 18:26:37 UTC 2014


On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Chris St. Pierre
<chris.a.st.pierre at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we need to take into account that there are multiple different
> purposes for a minimal image.  If I'm using the minimal image in Docker, I
> don't want or need sshd.  In other (non-container) places, I probably do.
> So maybe we need more than one minimal (or micro) -- 'micro' (outrageously
> small image for outrageously small machines) and 'micro-lxc' (even smaller
> image for even smaller containers).
>
> I definitely think yum should be included, though.  I should be able to 'RUN
> yum -y install ...' in my Dockerfile without first invoking some ugly 'RUN
> rpm -hvU http://...' mess.

For some purposes, you might want to look at what the 'rear' package
(from EPEL) does in terms of building a bootable image containing a
script to reconstruct the partitions/filesystems and restore a backup
to it.  With a little configuration you might be able to tune it to
restore exactly what you want, especially if you intend to effectively
clone a base install.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list