On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:48:41AM +0200, Tim Tassonis wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 09:11:51PM +0200, Tim Tassonis wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 06:09:50PM +0200, Tim Tassonis wrote:
Hi all
Yes, of course....but since it is mentioned that febootstrap is based on debootstrap, is there a technical reason for not just supporting debootstrap alternatively. I haven't got enough background regarding debootstrap/febootstrap and libguestfs to make a judgement about this though.
I summarised the options here:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-May/msg00003.html
For the Debian package I went with option (1), since Debian already has yum and rpm packaged.
Thanks, I guess in an ideal world the best solution would be to have a configure option like
--image=[febootstrap|debootstrap|fixed]
Better if it was:
--appliance=...
or so, and then the package would be setup to use febootstrap on redhat-based systems, debootstrap on debian-based system and fixed to use a pre-build image.
As you say, it won't be too difficult, but clearly the patch doesn't write itself ...
But such a patch to libguestfs would be accepted in your opinion?
Definitely yes, but you'll also want to liase with Guido Gunter as well, since he expressed an interest in doing this too.
Rich.