On Wed, Mar 8, 2023, at 11:39 AM, Troy Dawson wrote: > I'm wondering if the Alternative Images SIG[1] is the SIG you need. > We were thinking of doing containers, but it was farther down on the > list of things to get working. > The containers we were thinking of were "desktop" containers. Where > the application would be something graphical, or even possibly a whole > desktop. > But I could see being able to create bootc containers with the same > infrastructure, once it get's setup. At the current time, the container images being built here are using `rpm-ostree compose image` which is mainly oriented for bootable containers. Though nothing stops one from using it for non-bootable containers such as these too > One thing our SIG does not do is create/build packages. I'm not seeing > you say you need new/rebuilt packages. Do you need new/altered > packages? The https://github.com/containers/bootc is project is a net-new package right now. I'd like to manage it in a similar fashion to podman. Today, there is a https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rhcontainerbot/bootc/ COPR but which is under the same "rhcontainerbot" namespace as is used by podman developers. podman is shipped in RHEL though, whereas bootc is not (yet). I think though the SIG would probably do builds in the same way as other SIGs like hyperscale for the RPMs. > Or does everything get done via the setup scripts and > configs? The less bash scripts the better...almost all of the net-new code is Rust here.