On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 09:38 -0800, David Lutterkort wrote: > On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 10:28 +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > Interesting ... one thought is that you should expose the Package[1] > > class, and an UnWarePackage sub-class, from virtinst instead of UnWare. > > Also, I'd really only expect a single public Package method - pack(). > > > > Basically, I'm thinking about how the likes of livecd's image-creator > > could use this stuff. > > Yeah, I structured it that way because I didn't think there would be > many users for it - how would you include that with image-creator ? Are > you thinking of doing the image creation soup-to-nuts (kickstart to > tarball, really) in one big jump ? (soup-to-nuts? wtf? :-) But sure, why wouldn't an image creator not dump out the image in a distributable format rather than an intermediate format? I think of the image creator as being similar to rpmbuild in that respect. Also, it's partly about what API we want to add to virtinst and retain compatibility for in future versions. A simple Package base-class, a VMWarePackage sub-class and a pack() method sounds about the extent of the API we'd want to commit to at this point. Cheers, Mark. _______________________________________________ et-mgmt-tools mailing list et-mgmt-tools@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
