projectatomic / commissaire-mvp

A lightweight REST interface for upgrading, restarting, and bootstrapping new hosts into an existing Container Management cluster.
http://commissaire.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
GNU General Public License v3.0
15 stars 9 forks source link

"atomic" is more of model, not a distribution #194

Closed cgwalters closed 8 years ago

cgwalters commented 8 years ago

Right now we have e.g. https://github.com/projectatomic/commissaire/blob/b43ca2b9b33ab91def3f0c08a47f2d6fb66fb31a/src/commissaire/oscmd/atomic.py at the same level as fedora.py, which is wrong, because there are Atomic Host variants of Fedora/CentOS/RHEL.

Also, the and does not allow installing packages part is no longer true :smile:

cgwalters commented 8 years ago

Also, we should follow the upstream thread in https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/2016-August/msg00054.html and update these.

cgwalters commented 8 years ago

Also, comments like this are then also wrong:

        # Special case for atomic: Since Atomic doesn't advertise itself
        # and instead calls itself 'redhat' or 'centos' or 'fedora', we
        # need to check for 'atomicos' in other ansible_cmdline facts.
        atomic_os_types = {
            'redhat': '/ostree/rhel-atomic-host',
            'centos': '/ostree/centos-atomic-host',
            'fedora': '/ostree/fedora-atomic'
        }
ashcrow commented 8 years ago

@cgwalters good points.

What is your recommendation for properly sensing if an OS is using the Atomic model today?

cgwalters commented 8 years ago

Some projects use the existence of /run/ostree-booted which says whether or not the system uses ostree, however we don't quite have an equivalent model for rpm-ostree yet, though one could take the combination of the former and the existence of the latter in $PATH. We'll improve this.

mbarnes commented 8 years ago

I thought the plan was to indicate atomic in /etc/os-release by way of the VARIANT_ID field. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200122#c36

Has that not yet propagated? Seems much more straight-forward.

ashcrow commented 8 years ago

I think jlebon was looking into that @mbarnes.

@jlebon do you know if that is still on going?

jlebon commented 8 years ago

They're two separate issues. The RHBZ above was for setting the VARIANT_ID to atomic.host. Though it seems like this hasn't taken effect yet (as can be seen from the last comment there and also https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/issue/6).

What I worked on was a feature that adds the tree version number (e.g. 7.2.6) to the VERSION and PRETTY_NAME fields.

ashcrow commented 8 years ago

@jlebon thanks for the clarification!

ashcrow commented 8 years ago

(2) [multi-host-mgr] Clarify Atomic as a model