-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
where to move ignition dracut modules source code #16
Comments
Sounds fine to me. Just two additional questions to pick the name before moving the repo:
|
right now they are the same. Maybe if we need different ones for each we just create a separate branch?
yeah. I'd prefer to have these be ignition specific, can we think of a good place to put other dracut modules for FCOS? i.e. these would be modules that don't belong in the rest of Fedora OR in ignition specific modules. An |
I think it makes sense to have something like bootengine for FCOS (and RHCOS). There will almost certainly be differences, especially if things need to happen in the initramfs for the RHCOS bootstrapOS. I think it probably makes sense to have a "bootengine" repo for FCOS and then a fork of it for RHCOS. I don't think the Ignition repo should include dracut modules since the Ignition dracut modules tend to be very tightly coupled to the initramfs (and have subtle dependencies on things like certain filesystems being mounted, networking, etc). Finally, I'd like to keep the initramfs as minimal and clean as possible. If it's not 100% needed then we shouldn't include it. And we should do that from day 1, since removing things both has the potential to break things and it's really easy to put off removing things indefinitely. |
Calling it |
so there are three sources:
Are we proposing I like having the ignition modules separate personally, but recognize |
Yes, we're proposing 2/3. I don't follow what you mean by a I'd be in favor of dropping the "bootengine" name too. I think it came from a time when having "engine" in your name was hip. It's horribly vague. maybe |
I like the Regarding the second item, do we reasonably expect ignition module to be distro-independent, so that a separate |
I agree with @lucab. That's what I meant by saying the modules are very tightly coupled with the rest of the initramfs. |
|
so it seems like the concensus is to basically have two sources of dracut modules:
One thing I will point out is if we move other pieces of the Fedora offerings (like the fedora cloud base image) to use ignition, we would need a separate |
i'm starting to go back and just prefer moving |
cc @lucab @ajeddeloh since you had discussion input above |
I think we want Maybe add a note in the README with the a link explaining why |
I'm naive and tend to be optimistic. :) Any objection to us trying? I think if we could build in the ability to have 'common' bits and also distro specific bits into the ignition-dracut repo then it could work. So for example we have a This would require extra coordination with the other distros but would also mean we can all collaborate on the best ideas for running ignition in the initrd. I'd be interested to know what @thkukuk thinks. Of course if this experiment failed then we could fall back to every distro maintaining separate repos. |
I mean, there's already divergence from Container Linux. I think if we can unify *COS and CL then we have a shot, but otherwise I'm pretty pessimistic. |
On Mon, Oct 29, Dusty Mabe wrote:
This would require extra coordination with the other distros but would also
mean we can all collaborate on the best ideas for running ignition in the
initrd. I'd be interested to know what @thkukuk thinks.
Up to know, what we currently have works fine on openSUSE, at least
as far as I was able to test yet (except first boot detection, as
we do not touch that file, didn't looked at that yet and will not
before december).
The only part where I think distros will differ would be bootloader
support for first boot.
I think the common part with distribution specific overrides should work.
…--
Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
|
I agree that would be a good test, but the risk to CL might be high. Would a valid other test with low risk of breaking things (because nothing depends on this yet as no prod workloads are on it) be for fedora coreos, RH coreos, and Suse to share the repo? |
discussed in today's meeting. Will progress with moving this repo to https://github.com/coreos/ignition-dracut. |
Migrated. Repo now at: https://github.com/coreos/ignition-dracut |
They currently live at https://github.com/dustymabe/ignition-dracut. I propose we move them somewhere more proper like the coreos org on github. Is there a better place to put it? Any issues with moving them there?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: