[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Comments on live-build, vmdebootstrap, bootstrap-vz, and live-wrapper

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 08:31:28AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:02:30 +0000
> Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:56:12AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > We'd probably have to give up some of the tweaks we have, and add
> > > support either for plugins for some of the more basic tweaks
> > > directly into vmdebootstrap.  As an example, vmdebootstrap would
> > > almost certainly need to support raw images without a partition
> > > table. 
> I don't see what benefit that provides.

Paravirtualization when running Xen, EC2, etc. eg.

$ ls -l /dev/xvd*
brw-rw---T 1 root disk 202, 1 Jul 10 23:48 /dev/xvda1
brw-rw---T 1 root disk 202, 2 Jul 10 23:48 /dev/xvda2

I'm not sure if it would be possible to use pygrub if your assigned
volume is partitioned, which may be a problem if you don't control the

> This is why I'm unsure about the whole plugin request - if the build
> tool needs special knowledge to handle your special snowflake device,
> it is *your device* which is broken.

It's not your device if you don't own it.

I understand where you're coming from, but do you really want to
forego support for various IaaS environments (and probably a
significant number of other devices which might have legitimate
reasons for behaving differently which we cannot anticipate)?

I do agree that snowflake changes should be packaged wherever
possible, but I don't agree that we shouldn't support something just
because constraints of it dictate uncommon requirements.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: