On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:10 PM Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:15:52PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > > This is basically the problem I have with the work we're doing in IoT. > > The basically will make me re-evaluate if IoT is now worth doing at > > all in Fedora or whether I am now better off focusing my efforts > > elsewhere. > > Is there something specific you're concerned about, or is it a general > sense that there's likely to be something that you want updated? Since IoT > is ostree-based, is it possible we could solve this by including packages > from a newer module of whatever is problematic -- or even rawhide builds? > (That is, you say that modularity isn't capable of soving this, but I'm not > sure why not.) As an example, and this is one thing, if I need to build the kernel with some latest security feature in gcc to get some of the KSPP functionality I can't do that with modularity. Because so much of what IoT is doing is in a very small package set and is focused on a combination of removing as much as possible while tightening things down this not something that is achievable with modularity. The apps in containers are certainly able to make use of that, and I'm in particular the various versions of nodejs I'm sure will be used in IoT as there's a lot if IoT things that make use of nodejs. Peter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
