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

Re: Follow up on OKD 4

> On Jul 25, 2019, at 2:32 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin Fox pnnl gov> wrote:
> While "just works" is a great goal, and its relatively easy to accomplish in the nice, virtualized world of vm's, I've found it is often not the case in the dirty realm of real physical hardware. Sometimes you must rebuild/replace a kernel or add a kernel module to get things to actually work. If you don't support that, Its going to be a problem for many a site.

Ok, so this would be the “I want to be able to run my own kernel” use case.

That’s definitely something I would expect to be available with OKD in
the existing proposal, you would just be providing a different ostree
image at install time.

How often does this happen with fedora today?  I don’t hear it brought
up often so I may just be oblivious to something folks deal with more.
Certainly fcos should work everywhere existing fedora works, but if a
substantial set of people want that flexibility it’s a great data

> Thanks,
> Kevin
> ________________________________________
> From: dev-bounces lists openshift redhat com [dev-bounces lists openshift redhat com] on behalf of Josh Berkus [jberkus redhat com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 11:23 AM
> To: Clayton Coleman; Aleksandar Lazic
> Cc: users; dev
> Subject: Re: Follow up on OKD 4
>> On 7/25/19 6:51 AM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
>> 1. Openshift 4 isn’t flexible in the ways people want (Ie you want to
>> add an rpm to the OS to get a kernel module, or you want to ship a
>> complex set of config and managing things with mcd looks too hard)
>> 2. You want to build and maintain these things yourself, so the “just
>> works” mindset doesn’t appeal.
> FWIW, 2.5 years ago when we were exploring having a specific
> Atomic+Openshift distro for Kubernetes, we did a straw poll of Fedora
> Cloud users.  We found that 2/3 of respondees wanted a complete package
> (that is, OKD+Atomic) that installed and "just worked" out of the box,
> and far fewer folks wanted to hack their own.  We never had such a
> release due to insufficient engineering resources (and getting stuck
> behind the complete rewrite of the Fedora build pipelines), but that was
> the original goal.
> Things may have changed in the interim, but I think that a broad user
> survey would still find a strong audience for a "just works" distro in
> Fedora.
> --
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Kubernetes Community
> Red Hat OSAS
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev lists openshift redhat com
> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev

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