Hi. Charles Plessy <ple...@debian.org> writes:
> One reason why bootstrap-vz exists is that broader frameworks such as > Debian-Installer have more constraints and are harder to learn and maintain. > In particular, Debian-Installer does not run as a simple command that prepares > a tarball on a user's hard drive; it is a minimal Debian system that runs > by itself. > > But I think that attempts to build larger frameworks than bootstrap-vz will > end > up re-inventing an installer for Debian. So for a Grand Unification I > recommend to work on Debian-Installer directly. > With respect to docker (in the context of #746394), I think that the providing of images should be much lighter than what the Debian installer usually does. AFAIU, docker containers are meant to be very lightweight, compared to installing on real hardware, and whereas it would be sad to reinvent the wheels the d-i is already providing, I think that much of its work is to detect hardware and configure appropriately, which is completely useless in the context of docker, since there's no hardware emulation, no real virtual machine, just a chroot-like container (LXC based), at least in the usual use of docker containers based on LXC running over Linux. So bootstrap-vz running debootstrap is probably much of what we need for a bootstrap-vz Docker provider, I guess (and the devil which is in the details). Hope this makes sense. Best regards, -- Olivier BERGER <olivier.ber...@it-sudparis.eu> - OpenPGP: 5819D7E8 Ingénieur Recherche - Dept INF - T&MSP (http://www.it-sudparis.eu) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org