On 8/26/19 9:39 PM, John Harris wrote:
I'm not saying not to use containers. There is a right way to do it, and a wrong way to do it. A container should be as the name describes, a containerized installation of the distro in question, with the utilities needed to support a given role. Not something that never gets updated, never gets security fixes. Deploying new GNU/Linux based systems without engaging a sysadmin or the sysadmin team sounds like a recipe for disaster.
That may be your use case, but not the way others use them. You can still use containers how you want. But either do some research about how containers can be used in different ways or stop telling others that they're doing it wrong. A common use case is for containers to be throw away. If something needs updating, a new container is created and tested and then deployed replacing the existing one. No online updates.
I disagree, and I find your remarks to be quite hostile. The smallest viable container can exist without getting rid of required utilities, such as the package manager.
And you can still use it with the package manager if you want. But there are completely valid use cases that don't have any use for the package manager and want the smallest container possible. There was nothing hostile about the replies to you. They are just telling you that your case is not the only one and to stop telling them that they are wrong.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
