Re: Publishing raw generic{,cloud} images without tar, and without compression, plus versionning of point releases

[Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>]

On 5/26/20 9:26 PM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:29:17AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> The images have 700-800MB of space used, which is still three times the
>>> size of the qcow2 file.  Why do you refuse to use what's already there?
>>
>> I already explained: because downloading from ADSL, extracting, then
>> re-uploading to a cloud provider, is a stupid way of doing things, when
>> one could just point to the URL of the artifact and let the cloud
>> provider do the download.
> 
> Yes, but you point it to the _qcow2_ image.  Which, for generic, is
> about 250-300MB in size, as it is somewhat compressed, and can be read
> by all the OpenStack tools.
> 
> (Fun fact: even the OpenStack provided tool to generate the Octavia
> images does qcow2 by default.)
> [https://docs.openstack.org/octavia/latest/admin/amphora-image-build.html]
> 
>> Also, as I wrote earlier, it's not 700-800MB, but less than 512MB, and
>> we could reduce the size of the raw images to that.
> 
> Please show me this existing 512MB image you are talking about.  At
> least right now it does not exist.  The build log currently even clearly
> states how much space is used.

Sure! The latest genericcloud bullseye daily image:
http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/cloud/bullseye/daily/20200527-276/debian-11-genericcloud-amd64-daily-20200527-276.tar.xz

Though *BULLSHIT*, it's actually only a 507 MB sparse file, not even a
512 MB one ... :)

Even if it was around 700-800MB, that doesn't change my point, which is
the 2GB resulting image is still too big and could be less than half its
current size.

> At the last sprint we talked about how minimal the image should be.  The
> majority wanted to have more tools in it.

Yeah, and I'm still on that side. That doesn't change anything to what
I'm talking about either.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)