On 05/03/2016 11:50 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 05/03/2016 07:34 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Dusty Mabe <dusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> If we don't do this it will try to use grub2 but will fail >>> because we removed the packages from the package set. >> >> And does extlinux work in all the Vagrant use cases (I've never used >> it)? My understanding of using extlinux was because it was small and >> works on AWS for those images, in the case of vagrant it's 40Gb in >> size so size is not really an issue here and grub2 likely works better >> in the developer workstations (what ever Windows/Mac user use for >> hypervisors) use case so it might be better to explicitly add the >> packages to the vagrant image rather than move it to extlinux. >> > > Hey Peter, > > Thanks for bringing this up. I'll check that it works on the various > targets. This works on both virtualbox and libvirt vagrant providers. These are the two we cover right now so that should suffice. > > I had previously suggested that we go back to using grub2 (like we did > in F23) for fedora cloud base (both base and vagrant images) but dgilmore/mattdm, > and I decided to stick with extlinux for the space savings. This assumes that > we don't hit any problems in testing. > > I'd like to keep the cloud base and the cloud base vagrant image using > the same bootloader for consistency. If we hit problems with extlinux > for vagrant then I'd prefer we switch both cloud base and cloud base > vagrant images back to grub2. I'd prefer to not have them differ on > that front. > > What do you think? > _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
