On Wed, 27.08.14 20:35, Václav Pavlín (vpavlin(a)redhat.com) wrote:
>So what is "systemd-container" supposed to do? And what
precisely is
>"fakesystemd" supposed to do? And that "mini" thing?
fakesystemd owns same directories systemd does and has set provides
to fulfill most RPM dependencies for systemd. For example you want
to run httpd in your Docker container which brings systemd,
devicemapper, kmod... in. If the base image contains fakesystemd
none of these dependencies is installed. If you really need systemd
in you container you can use following command:
yum swap -- remove fakesystemd -- install systemd systemd-libs
systemd-container (I think it's the same thing you refer to as
"mini") should remove dependencies which does not make sense in
container (again devicemapper, kmod...) and hwdb and should run as
init in multi-service containers. Well I am not sure if it ends up
being really "systemd-container" or simply "fixed" systemd. If I am
not mistaken this was second topic for last Base WG meeting which we
didn't get to:) So hopefully this week?
I am not on the base WG. I was not selected for it. If you come up with
schemes like this, it is really a good idea to actually ask the people
who work on the package you are trying to work on or work around...
Can we please do this stuff more systematically?
I also offered to split out the hwdb in Brno, if you remember. If this
is about the hwdb, then let's just do that...
But regarding kmod/devicemapper, can we please get some stats about how
big this individually are, and how much is saved by this? kmod at least
is 150K or so only. Is there really any value in doing this weird stuff
for a fricking 150K?! Fedora has no bigger fishes to fry?
The systemd-container or fakesystemd stuff sounds awfully adhoc. Can we
please always discuss this first, and see if we can find a different
solution? We don't need three different "solutions", if one works too...
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat