On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Bastian Blank <wa...@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:13:59AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > I don't get your thing about tar. Can you explain why we should use tar? > > This makes it possible to build small variations without doing the whole > dance again. Plus it makes it possible to review if the output is > reasonable. > I agree that a tar should be provided as one of the outputs yes. This is one of the formats that Ubuntu Cloud does too ala 'rootfs' (and insert X usb linux distro here). It does not however need to be based on a tar if that is what is being debated (or the master is a tar). Its a completely normal practice to build an image in mounted loopback with a .img (raw) and then convert that to desired formats, packages and the root fs into a flat file tar. For 'transformations' where you modify files or run commands in chroot of the filesystem that is within the artifact, its actually more dancing to extract a tarball than it is to simply mount an image in loopback. > > Bastian > > -- > Deflector shields just came on, Captain. > >
