colinwalters

4 ms·

1.
by colinwalters 13y ago
> I'll put this differently; how can OSTree reliably get a system from StateSRC -> StateDEST without filesystem-level snapshots? Your comment strongly implies to me you don't understand how it works. It's really really
2.
by colinwalters 13y ago
> With that said, yes, I think OSTree needs filesystem snapshot support I'm happy with the fact that it allows admins to choose whatever they want at the filesystem and block level, the same as dpkg/rpm do. For example in a cl
3.
by colinwalters 13y ago
> Perhaps we should be looking at integrating ostree and docker then? :) It might make sense for docker to be able to store containers as OSTree commits in addition to tarfiles. But I haven't used it myself. On the HTTP side, OSTr
4.
by colinwalters 13y ago
If you think OSTree needs filesystem snapshot support, you aren't understanding how it works. Or perhaps we don't have a shared definition of "robust" - for me, assuming correct behaviour at the filesystem and block l
5.
by colinwalters 13y ago
Right, this is a pretty good summary (that docker is 1 level above). One fundamental difference is that OSTree has a custom serialization format for trees (inspired by git), whereas from what I can tell from the code, docker is just tar (I
6.
by colinwalters 13y ago
The snapshot + "live upgrade in place" has quite different semantics. First, while I am actually looking at LVM snapshots for a different project, making them actually atomic would require integrating with the bootloader in a m