Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Container images are often not used and maintained in the same way as
> a traditional OS. If people want to pull in the latest RPM updates,
> they won't run 'dnf update' in the container, they'll simply build
> a new container image. Being able to query/manipulate the RPM DB
> inside a container just isn't a high priority requirement in general.
> It does have its downsides, as it is sometimes useful to query the
> RPM DB for debugging purposes, but that doesn't mean it is broken.
> It is simply a different approach / attitude / tradeoff towards using
> & maintaining the software stack.
>
> This change proposal is showing that some of the debugging needs
> can be satisfied in a different way that's arguably more reliable
> for both container & non-container use cases, as it is guaranteed
> to reflect what is actually resident in memory.
Well, my take is that it is really weird that the response to "I deleted the
metadata from my container and now I cannot query the very metadata I
deleted." (hardly a surprise!) is "Let us just duplicate the same metadata
somewhere else, bloating the files for all users, even those who did *not*
delete the data it turns out they need." I cannot follow that logic at all.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
