hi
The Docker folks host an image for CentOS Linux 6 here : https://index.docker.io/_/centos/ - looking to upgrade this image, and to take ownership of that account ( for the CCIS ) I've built an image, which is in line with the existing image they host, but has been updated to include content released via mirror.centos.org to today.
http://cloud.centos.org/centos/6/devel/CentOS-6-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.im... is the image
please test
worth noting that this is represented as CentOS-6, dropping the point release and replacing it with a date - means we can update it more frequently than only at every point release time ( and we set user expectation around that ). We can, if there is a need, still push images that are in line with a point release snapshot.
Unless there is reason not to, Jim and I will start working towards replacing that docker official centos image with his one in the next 24 hrs.
regards
On 04/11/2014 11:31 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi
The Docker folks host an image for CentOS Linux 6 here : https://index.docker.io/_/centos/ - looking to upgrade this image, and to take ownership of that account ( for the CCIS ) I've built an image, which is in line with the existing image they host, but has been updated to include content released via mirror.centos.org to today.
http://cloud.centos.org/centos/6/devel/CentOS-6-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.im... is the image
updated image : http://cloud.centos.org/centos/6/devel/CentOS-6-20140412-x86_64-docker_01.im...
that resolves: - selinux can now be in enforcing mode on the host - rpm db is now usable out of the box, so things like : "docker run -t -i <id> yum install ruby" will work without needing a rebuilddb first.
- KB
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
worth noting that this is represented as CentOS-6, dropping the point release and replacing it with a date - means we can update it more frequently than only at every point release time ( and we set user expectation around that ). We can, if there is a need, still push images that are in line with a point release snapshot.
Do you think it would be beneficial to have both the point release and the date? For example:
CentOS-6.5-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.img.tar.bz2
If you start to try to compare behavior within this image to CentOS 6.5 installed on a normal piece of hardware it might be easier if we can easily look at the image file name and know what point release to compare it to.
An argument can also be made that this might spark confusion.
Thoughts?
Dusty
On Apr 12, 2014 10:31 AM, "Dusty Mabe" dustymabe@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org
wrote:
Do you think it would be beneficial to have both the point release and the date? For example:
CentOS-6.5-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.img.tar.bz2
If you start to try to compare behavior within this image to CentOS 6.5 installed on a normal piece of hardware it might be easier if we can easily look at the image file name and know what point release to compare it to.
An argument can also be made that this might spark confusion.
It seems clearest to omit the point release if the image includes updates through the build date, and to include the point release if each RPM is the same version as on the ISO (aside from any Docker-specific additional RPMs or similar directly relevant tweaks).
The current Google Compute Engine CentOS images include updates as of build time but do not include the point release in the image name. We might include it in the description, I forget.
- Jimmy
On 04/12/2014 06:31 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
worth noting that this is represented as CentOS-6, dropping the point release and replacing it with a date - means we can update it more frequently than only at every point release time ( and we set user expectation around that ). We can, if there is a need, still push images that are in line with a point release snapshot.
Do you think it would be beneficial to have both the point release and the date? For example:
CentOS-6.5-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.img.tar.bz2
If you start to try to compare behavior within this image to CentOS 6.5 installed on a normal piece of hardware it might be easier if we can easily look at the image file name and know what point release to compare it to.
An argument can also be made that this might spark confusion.
Thoughts?
There is certainly value in having GA / ISO matching images in most places as well, for those - adding the point qualifyer makes sense. But I think the default image we recommend people adopt should just be the CentOS-<Release>-<datestamp> one, also available as CentOS-<Release>-latest; So people getting onboard, get the best possible experience, and those who know what they are doing and still want a GA inline release, can get it - by jumping through a hoop or two.
- KB
Once we have a release-quality image, won't most people get the image from the Docker registry? So the name of the tarball isn't so much important as the tag, which already tracks the creation date. We'll want to have a discussion about that tagging strategy at some point, but spending too many cycles on how to name the tarballs, which should only be for testing images that aren't GA yet, seems a waste.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.orgwrote:
On 04/12/2014 06:31 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org
wrote:
worth noting that this is represented as CentOS-6, dropping the point release and replacing it with a date - means we can update it more frequently than only at every point release time ( and we set user expectation around that ). We can, if there is a need, still push images that are in line with a point release snapshot.
Do you think it would be beneficial to have both the point release and the date? For example:
CentOS-6.5-20140411-x86_64-docker_01.img.tar.bz2
If you start to try to compare behavior within this image to CentOS 6.5 installed on a normal piece of hardware it might be easier if we can easily look at the image file name and know what point release to compare it to.
An argument can also be made that this might spark confusion.
Thoughts?
There is certainly value in having GA / ISO matching images in most places as well, for those - adding the point qualifyer makes sense. But I think the default image we recommend people adopt should just be the CentOS-<Release>-<datestamp> one, also available as CentOS-<Release>-latest; So people getting onboard, get the best possible experience, and those who know what they are doing and still want a GA inline release, can get it - by jumping through a hoop or two.
- KB
-- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
Chris St. Pierre -
Dusty Mabe -
Jimmy Kaplowitz -
Karanbir Singh