Fedora CoreOS Meeting Minutes 2019-06-05
by Benjamin Gilbert
Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-06-05/fedora_core...
Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-06-05/fedora_core...
Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-06-05/fedora_core...
========================================
#fedora-meeting-1: fedora_coreos_meeting
========================================
Meeting started by bgilbert at 16:30:10 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-06-05/fedora_core...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* roll call (bgilbert, 16:30:17)
* Reminder that we're switching the meeting format back to only
meeting tickets + open floor (bgilbert, 16:34:08)
* LINK:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/coreos@lists.fedoraproject....
(bgilbert, 16:34:11)
* Action items from last meeting (bgilbert, 16:34:26)
* Signing for release artifacts (bgilbert, 16:34:52)
* LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/187
(bgilbert, 16:34:55)
* will be discussing this with infra tomorrow during their weekly
meeting (dustymabe, 16:35:26)
* LINK:
https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/187#issuecomment-4...
(dustymabe, 16:35:37)
* Open Floor (bgilbert, 17:02:17)
Meeting ended at 17:06:22 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* bgilbert (49)
* dustymabe (19)
* red_beard (18)
* zodbot (17)
* jlebon (6)
* ajeddeloh (4)
* kaeso[m] (3)
* geoff- (2)
* yzhang (1)
* rfairley (1)
* slowrie (1)
* mnguyen_ (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
5 years
Re: RFC: Atomic Updates configuration handling proposal by Thorsten Kukuk for CoreOS
by Thorsten Kukuk
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 04, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> On 6/3/19 8:27 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Also, in general, it seems we really don't have a good way to handle
> > users and groups. I know that there was a proposal from Stephen and
> > Harald[3] that was intended to try to improve this for adding and
> > removing them, but it doesn't really address the problem of giving
> > people a way to have coherent files to look at the whole state.
> >
> > My thought here was that we could have an SSSD plugin that combines
> > the partial passwd(5), shadow(5), and group(5) files in
> > /usr/share/sysconfig and /etc and spits out "full" transient ones in
> > /run that people can look at. This makes it easier to support
> > stateless systems that are also a mix of local and remote users
> > managed through systems like IdM.
>
> I know Jonathan and Colin have mentioned something called systemd-sysusers
> a lot when problems around users/groups have come up in Atomic Host/Silverblue/CoreOS
> Maybe that is the answer. Someone more familiar would have to comment. See:
>
> https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/issues/49
We did evaluate systemd-sysusers already 3 years ago as solution, but
there is one big problem: if files in the RPM are owned by the user,
you need to create the user before you are able to install the RPM.
But systemd-sysuser only runs at the next boot. So we would need a
service, which is running afterwards, to "fix" the ownership of this
files. In some cases, this can lead to a deadlock.
So currently we are using systemd-sysusers config file for new users,
but have a macro, which creates this accounts based on the sysusers
file with help of useradd/groupadd (systemd has far too many dependencies
and thus installed too late during an initial install).
> > I know that this is a bit of an FHS-ish discussion, but I'd like to
> > see us get firmer agreements on what we'd like to do between RH/Fedora
> > CoreOS and openSUSE MicroOS before we go and propose something to be
> > included in the FHS.
> >
> > We already have the pending /usr/lib/sysimage thing, and I'd like to
> > get a location in place for configuration data too.
> >
> > Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you took a look into it yourself and let
> > us know what you think!
>
> I'd be interested in other FCOS community member thoughts here. I'd also
> be interested to know what you think are good next steps for this initiative?
From discussions with the openSUSE community: find a location below /usr
for the configuration files. That's the most blocking issue and would
allow immeaditly to move first configuration files.
There should be one location everybody is using, so /usr/share is already
bad, as this means shareable between different hosts, which is not true
for all configuration data. /usr/lib is already overcrowed and with too many
things (bug would be acceptable for me, if we decide on one subdirectory,
where we move everything). /usr/etc is still a directory used most often
today, not only on Linux systems. But quite some people don't like it.
So we need something new, where I like from all proposals /usr/sysconfig
best.
Else, currently it looks like, as if openSUSE will do it if other
distributions join.
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
5 years
RFC: Atomic Updates configuration handling proposal by Thorsten Kukuk for CoreOS
by Neal Gompa
Hey all,
When I was at SUSECON a couple of months ago, one of the things that
came up then was a discussion with Thorsten Kukuk (one of the major
folks leading openSUSE MicroOS/Kubic stuff and is CC'd to this email)
about how to handle config files in an atomically updated system (or
even a regular one!) in a smarter way.
Thorsten here came up some proposals[0] which are very solid and also
lines up well with some of the other things I'm working toward, as
some of you may know from what I've discussed in the IRC channel.
At the openSUSE Conference, he gave an excellent talk about it[1][2]
and we had some great discussions with the DNF team about how to
further support this.
I have one main quibble currently with it: I think /usr/share/defaults
is not descriptive of what it is _and_ does. I much prefer
/usr/share/sysconfig (though I might be persuaded to
/usr/share/baseconfig or /usr/share/defconfig). There is, of course,
the /usr/etc idea, but I *really* don't like the idea of keeping dumb
names from the 70s if we don't have to. "etc" doesn't describe that
it's for configuration _at all_. And if we're introducing a new
location, let's make it more descriptive than that. :)
Also, in general, it seems we really don't have a good way to handle
users and groups. I know that there was a proposal from Stephen and
Harald[3] that was intended to try to improve this for adding and
removing them, but it doesn't really address the problem of giving
people a way to have coherent files to look at the whole state.
My thought here was that we could have an SSSD plugin that combines
the partial passwd(5), shadow(5), and group(5) files in
/usr/share/sysconfig and /etc and spits out "full" transient ones in
/run that people can look at. This makes it easier to support
stateless systems that are also a mix of local and remote users
managed through systems like IdM.
I think there's still quite a bit of value in the proposal, and
perhaps this is something we can work on together to agree on how this
should look for RH/Fedora CoreOS and openSUSE MicroOS. And actually, I
think this would benefit regular Fedora/openSUSE too, because having
the ability to unbreak a system by simply deleting a file in /etc to
roll back is pretty good. This speaks to the general "let's make it
easy to fix stupid" thing I was talking quite a bit about.
I know that this is a bit of an FHS-ish discussion, but I'd like to
see us get firmer agreements on what we'd like to do between RH/Fedora
CoreOS and openSUSE MicroOS before we go and propose something to be
included in the FHS.
We already have the pending /usr/lib/sysimage thing, and I'd like to
get a location in place for configuration data too.
Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you took a look into it yourself and let
us know what you think!
[0]: https://github.com/thkukuk/atomic-updates_and_etc/blob/master/README.md
[1]: https://youtu.be/ony0ajC0PWA
[2]: https://github.com/thkukuk/atomic-updates_and_etc/raw/master/Slides/Atomi...
[3]: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/850
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
5 years
Re: RFC: Atomic Updates configuration handling proposal by Thorsten Kukuk for CoreOS
by Thorsten Kukuk
Sorry, wrote from the wrong email account.
----- Forwarded message from Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk(a)suse.de> -----
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:07:11 +0200
From: Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk(a)suse.de>
To: Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com>
Cc: coreos(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, Ben Breard <bbreard(a)redhat.com>, Dusty Mabe
<dustymabe(a)redhat.com>, Daniel Mach <dmach(a)redhat.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Atomic Updates configuration handling proposal by Thorsten
Kukuk for CoreOS
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 03, Neal Gompa wrote:
> I have one main quibble currently with it: I think /usr/share/defaults
> is not descriptive of what it is _and_ does. I much prefer
> /usr/share/sysconfig (though I might be persuaded to
> /usr/share/baseconfig or /usr/share/defconfig).
My problem currently is more /usr/share at all. It should only contain
architecture independent data, so that you can share it between all
machines (but I really doubt that anybody is still doing so today).
But there are some configuration files, which are not architecture
independent, not even host independent. E.g. passwd, shadow, ...
But the feedback was also, that /usr/lib is already overcrowded and
chaotic and nobody finds there anything anymore...
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
5 years
