On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 02:59:37PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:56 PM Simo Sorce <simo(a)redhat.com>
> I have to ask,
> given containers are so popular and can deal with any dependency
> without conflicting with system installed binaries, should we really
> continue with this very complicated modular design ?
> Shouldn't we go back to have default packages and then defer to
> "containers" for applications (and their dependencies) that need to
> deviate from system defaults for any reason ?
And where is the software for those containers coming from? Some
From distribution repositories? Like it always did?
container registry like Docker Hub? One of the main points of
Modularity is to provide a trusted source of software to install into
We had this (FROM fedora:30…) before Modularity. Yes, there is a
problem when you run Fedora N with specific software version Y,
and you want to build container with software version Y-2, which
was shipped in Fedora N-4. You would need to create container from
unsupported, unsecure version of Fedora N-4. But you have no
guarantee that maintainer will provide software verson Y-2 built as
module on top of Fedora N.
At the moment modularity broke most basic functionality – upgrade from
Fedora N to N+1.
Tomasz Torcz ,,(...) today's high-end is tomorrow's embedded
xmpp: zdzichubg(a)chrome.pl -- Mitchell Blank on LKML