6 ms·

Are you thinking of Container Linux by CoreOS (The company purchased by Red Hat)? Fedora CoreOS is a continuation of Container Linux. See https://en.wikipedia.

Are you thinking of Container Linux by CoreOS (The company purchased by Red Hat)? Fedora CoreOS is a continuation of Container Linux. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_Linux#Derivatives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_Linux#Derivatives

usr1106 7y ago
Yes, sorry, unprecise terminology. When I say CoreOS I mean CoreOS Container Linux. Fedora CoreOS is marketed to be a continuation. But it's not a seamless one, it requires manual porting. Detailed instructions don't exist yet, but the list is not that short https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/159 https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/159. While most people won't be affected by many items, a couple of days are easily burned for understanding, coding and testing. Coding probably the smallest part, but if everything goes without "surprises" in real life, I would be surprised.
- yebyen 7y ago
  This is generally one of the philosophical differences I see between the RHAT family of distributions and some others (those that I personally favor), that seamless upgrades are generally not well supported from each major version to next. For example, and I'm sure I'm oversimplifying, and there are caveats; for years, I've maintained Debian and Ubuntu machines which I've used mostly staying inside of the bounds of the apt package manager, and since many years I've never had a need to question whether I could "dist-upgrade" from one release to the next. It just works. It is a supported operation, and reliably so. At my current job, we use Amazon Linux, a distro which I understand to be mostly derived from CentOS with Amazon addons, (and I'm open to being corrected if anybody knows better, but...) one of the things we're coping with right now is that Amazon Linux 2 does not have an upgrade path from Amazon Linux 1. We are on the hook to rebuild those machines, it's a fact that has given us pause to seriously re-evaluate whether we want to stay on the same train, or get off and switch to another paradigm broadly. I don't strongly see this as a decision that Amazon made, because I'm fairly sure it's also true that upgrades from eg CentOS 6 to 7 are unsupported. And CentOS apparently got this idea from RedHat Enterprise Linux upstream, which provides this helpful page locked behind paywall[1], but from above the fold you can tell at least one thing without logging in: there are only a limited set of cases where upgrades are supported, even with a paid subscription to RHEL. [1]: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/637583 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/637583
  - emmelaich 7y ago
    I've upgraded multiple Fedora machines from Fedora 19 up to the current Fedora 30 without too much issue. Contrariwise, I've found various issues with Debian and Ubuntu. That said, I rarely do dist upgrades of prod systems at all; I install the base os from scratch (pxeboot etc) and use automation to install the rest.
    - d0ugal 7y ago
      I’m the same. I never upgrade cattle, they get replaced and only pets are upgraded.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - yebyen 7y ago
      I will concede, Fedora has as good a reputation and it's what I run on my desktop at home! Good point.
  - dralley 7y ago
    Honestly I've had more success migrating between versions of the Fedora family than the Ubuntu family. I don't have enough experience with Debian to judge. In an case I disagree totally with the assertion that Fedora isn't good at upgrades between versions. CentOS 7 upgrade would be tricky to do automatically because of the systemd transition and the fact that any Enterprise user would likely have a ton of services they need to migrate safely.
    - hoistbypetard 7y ago
      > In an case I disagree totally with the assertion that Fedora isn't good at upgrades between versions. Same here. I think that changed somewhere around Fedora 15, though. Prior to that it was a minefield. That's probably why it has such a bad reputation among those who've not tried recently. My current desktop workstation started out at Fedora 14 and now sits at 31. It's gone through multiple motherboard and component upgrades over that time, too.
- jhart99 7y ago
  From what I've seen so far, it is a continuation in name only. Many of the things that made CoreOS nice have disappeared like locksmith, and other stuff has been made incompatible for no good reason, for example dropping docker...
  - cmurf 7y ago
    Fedora has preferred podman for a while, it's not unique to Fedora CoreOS. Much of that has to do with Docker's choices. moby-engine https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=27395 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=27... docker https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5145 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=51... podman https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=26289 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=26...
  - kaeso 7y ago
    > have disappeared like locksmith Locksmith[0] implementation is tightly coupled to the specific update daemon, so it can't be directly re-used outside of Container Linux or without update-engine[1]. Its logic has been ported over to Zincati[2], which performs reboot management on top of rpm-ostree[3]. [0] https://github.com/coreos/locksmith https://github.com/coreos/locksmith [1] https://github.com/coreos/update_engine https://github.com/coreos/update_engine [2] https://github.com/coreos/zincati https://github.com/coreos/zincati [3] https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree
  - the_why_of_y 7y ago
    Last I heard Docker still doesn't support cgroups-v2, 4 years after it was merged into Linux. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/diff/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt?id=v4.5&id2=v4.4 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
- deogeo 7y ago
  > but if everything goes without "surprises" in real life, I would be surprised. Do you also shave all those, and those only, who do not shave themselves?

usr1106 7y ago

Yes, sorry, unprecise terminology. When I say CoreOS I mean CoreOS Container Linux. Fedora CoreOS is marketed to be a continuation. But it's not a seamless one, it requires manual porting. Detailed instructions don't exist yet, but the list is not that short https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/159 https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/159. While most people won't be affected by many items, a couple of days are easily burned for understanding, coding and testing. Coding probably the smallest part, but if everything goes without "surprises" in real life, I would be surprised.

yebyen 7y ago
This is generally one of the philosophical differences I see between the RHAT family of distributions and some others (those that I personally favor), that seamless upgrades are generally not well supported from each major version to next. For example, and I'm sure I'm oversimplifying, and there are caveats; for years, I've maintained Debian and Ubuntu machines which I've used mostly staying inside of the bounds of the apt package manager, and since many years I've never had a need to question whether I could "dist-upgrade" from one release to the next. It just works. It is a supported operation, and reliably so. At my current job, we use Amazon Linux, a distro which I understand to be mostly derived from CentOS with Amazon addons, (and I'm open to being corrected if anybody knows better, but...) one of the things we're coping with right now is that Amazon Linux 2 does not have an upgrade path from Amazon Linux 1. We are on the hook to rebuild those machines, it's a fact that has given us pause to seriously re-evaluate whether we want to stay on the same train, or get off and switch to another paradigm broadly. I don't strongly see this as a decision that Amazon made, because I'm fairly sure it's also true that upgrades from eg CentOS 6 to 7 are unsupported. And CentOS apparently got this idea from RedHat Enterprise Linux upstream, which provides this helpful page locked behind paywall[1], but from above the fold you can tell at least one thing without logging in: there are only a limited set of cases where upgrades are supported, even with a paid subscription to RHEL. [1]: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/637583 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/637583
- emmelaich 7y ago
  I've upgraded multiple Fedora machines from Fedora 19 up to the current Fedora 30 without too much issue. Contrariwise, I've found various issues with Debian and Ubuntu. That said, I rarely do dist upgrades of prod systems at all; I install the base os from scratch (pxeboot etc) and use automation to install the rest.
  - d0ugal 7y ago
    I’m the same. I never upgrade cattle, they get replaced and only pets are upgraded.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - yebyen 7y ago
    I will concede, Fedora has as good a reputation and it's what I run on my desktop at home! Good point.
- dralley 7y ago
  Honestly I've had more success migrating between versions of the Fedora family than the Ubuntu family. I don't have enough experience with Debian to judge. In an case I disagree totally with the assertion that Fedora isn't good at upgrades between versions. CentOS 7 upgrade would be tricky to do automatically because of the systemd transition and the fact that any Enterprise user would likely have a ton of services they need to migrate safely.
  - hoistbypetard 7y ago
    > In an case I disagree totally with the assertion that Fedora isn't good at upgrades between versions. Same here. I think that changed somewhere around Fedora 15, though. Prior to that it was a minefield. That's probably why it has such a bad reputation among those who've not tried recently. My current desktop workstation started out at Fedora 14 and now sits at 31. It's gone through multiple motherboard and component upgrades over that time, too.
jhart99 7y ago
From what I've seen so far, it is a continuation in name only. Many of the things that made CoreOS nice have disappeared like locksmith, and other stuff has been made incompatible for no good reason, for example dropping docker...
- cmurf 7y ago
  Fedora has preferred podman for a while, it's not unique to Fedora CoreOS. Much of that has to do with Docker's choices. moby-engine https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=27395 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=27... docker https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5145 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=51... podman https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=26289 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=26...
- kaeso 7y ago
  > have disappeared like locksmith Locksmith[0] implementation is tightly coupled to the specific update daemon, so it can't be directly re-used outside of Container Linux or without update-engine[1]. Its logic has been ported over to Zincati[2], which performs reboot management on top of rpm-ostree[3]. [0] https://github.com/coreos/locksmith https://github.com/coreos/locksmith [1] https://github.com/coreos/update_engine https://github.com/coreos/update_engine [2] https://github.com/coreos/zincati https://github.com/coreos/zincati [3] https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree
- the_why_of_y 7y ago
  Last I heard Docker still doesn't support cgroups-v2, 4 years after it was merged into Linux. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/diff/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt?id=v4.5&id2=v4.4 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
deogeo 7y ago
> but if everything goes without "surprises" in real life, I would be surprised. Do you also shave all those, and those only, who do not shave themselves?