Add extensions.yaml (subset of RHCOS) #1080
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jlebon
previously approved these changes
Jul 5, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Weak LGTM. It's a no-op, though I'd argue there's still a non-zero cost to carry this here when we're not actually using it.
Will let @dustymabe or @bgilbert chime in.
| @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ | |||
| # RPMs as operating system extensions, distinct from the base ostree commit/image | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe let's add a big comment here that we're not actually officially using this in FCOS and it's just for development?
|
How much of the developer pain is actually due to openshift/os#552 and so not being able to just build RHCOS in the same toolbox on which you hack on rpm-ostree? |
|
Hmm, if we don't (yet) have a concrete use for this, I'd say I'm weakly opposed. |
|
FWIW we do support extensions in OKD, so maybe it can be put into okd-machine-os for now? |
This is a subset of the `extensions.yaml` from https://github.com/openshift/os My immediate motivation is that day to day I develop in a Fedora toolbox targeting FCOS, and I wanted to test `rpm-ostree compose extensions` as `cosa buildextend-extensions` invokes it, and it's easier if we have a file here. Since the FCOS pipeline doesn't invoke `cosa buildextend-extensions`, this will be a no-op. Or stated more strongly: We might just use this as part of e.g. rpm-ostree's CI runs. But...one could imagine that we actually share the list of extensions between FCOS and RHCOS in the future. Or more obviously, perhaps we actually do something with this FCOS extensions list and don't actually offer "all Fedora packages" as extensions.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a subset of the
extensions.yamlfromhttps://github.com/openshift/os
My immediate motivation is that day to day I develop in
a Fedora toolbox targeting FCOS, and I wanted to test
rpm-ostree compose extensionsascosa buildextend-extensionsinvokes it, and it's easier if we have a file here.
Since the FCOS pipeline doesn't invoke
cosa buildextend-extensions,this will be a no-op.
Or stated more strongly: We might just use this as part of e.g.
rpm-ostree's CI runs.
But...one could imagine that we actually share the list of extensions
between FCOS and RHCOS in the future.
Or more obviously, perhaps we actually do something with this FCOS
extensions list and don't actually offer "all Fedora packages"
as extensions.