Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

coreos.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#31

Post by hardwaresofton »

meddlepal wrote: post #15
hardwaresofton wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am worried that I'm shitting on it without using it, but every time I even take a look at the documentation, I just can't stomach it. There's so much happening, all over the place, and it all looks like it was created to be composable, but it seems very non-optional (as in you need to learn 4 OpenShift things before you can do the thing you wanted to do). Maybe there's someone out there that loves working with it a…

IMO OpenShift is RedHat's attempt to embrace extend and extinguish vanilla Kubernetes because it threatens their Enterprise OS domination. The host OS for Kubernetes clusters is mostly irrelevant. It's like Kubernetes... forked from it, but adds all this other shit while they continue to just say it is Kubernetes under the hood. Technically true, but once you go to the OpenShift you're pretty much locked into RedHat'…

OpenShift predates Kubernetes by a bit, and IMO they operate at different levels (OpenShift is "deeper" and overlaps in some spots with Kubernetes). Also, I'm just about 100% sure no one is stupid/brave enough to challenge Kubernetes' current dominance in the container orchestration space right now. Kubernetes is complete enough and not-bad enough to be the defacto choice right now, and I doubt much will change -- plus Google is backing it, along with the CNCF, there are so many companies with a (in)vested interest.

I do think Red Hat replicates features that Kubernetes does well and trying to do those things well but they operate at different levels fundamentally -- Openshift is like a bunch of individual components that work together (usually at a lower level than Kubernetes does) and Kubernetes is like one coherent platform that smoothes over all the lower-level stuff (CRI, CSI, C*I)...

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#32

Post by thepumpkin1979 »

tyfon wrote: post #4
hardwaresofton wrote: post #2

This is exactly what I thought would happen when I switched off of CoreOS earlier this year. I recently switched back[0] since according to their blog post[1] Container Linux would live and not be replaced by their Atomic project... I thought I was a fool for overreacting. I don't want OpenShift, it looks like a bloated clusterfuck. I don't want Atomic either -- Container Linux had all the pieces I needed and not muc…

I think many are using Alpine linux [1]. It's very light weight and seem to be well suited for the task. [1] https://www.alpinelinux.org/

does Alpine Linux provide Transactional Updates?

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#33

Post by MaxBarraclough »

tyfon wrote: post #4
hardwaresofton wrote: post #2

This is exactly what I thought would happen when I switched off of CoreOS earlier this year. I recently switched back[0] since according to their blog post[1] Container Linux would live and not be replaced by their Atomic project... I thought I was a fool for overreacting. I don't want OpenShift, it looks like a bloated clusterfuck. I don't want Atomic either -- Container Linux had all the pieces I needed and not muc…

I think many are using Alpine linux [1]. It's very light weight and seem to be well suited for the task. [1] https://www.alpinelinux.org/

The 'virtual' version is a mere 32MB. Neat.

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#34

Post by vertex-four »

thepumpkin1979 wrote: post #32
tyfon wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many are using Alpine linux [1]. It's very light weight and seem to be well suited for the task. [1] https://www.alpinelinux.org/

does Alpine Linux provide Transactional Updates?

Try NixOS for something that has something close to transactional updates.

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#35

Post by hardwaresofton »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #33
tyfon wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many are using Alpine linux [1]. It's very light weight and seem to be well suited for the task. [1] https://www.alpinelinux.org/

The 'virtual' version is a mere 32MB. Neat.

Alpine is well known as the OS for containers[0]. BTW the guy pictured is Natanael Copa, the creator of Alpine Linux.

It's a fantastic distribution, and it's a pleasure to use.

[0]: https://thenewstack.io/alpine-linux-heart-docker/

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#36

Post by sctb »

t3f wrote: post #8

I think the title needs to be fixed, it's a tad sensationalist. The Google Groups message is just "Container Linux project update" and is dated May 18th. Since then, there has been more clarification [0], [1], [2], that really calls out a rationalization of the RH roadmap and where CoreOS fits. It might be fair to say that RH doesnt plan to support "CoreOS Container Linux" in exactly the fashion prior to acquisition,…

Thanks! A moderator updated the link from https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/coreos-user/PFHJQMJSRb....

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#37

Post by aplanas »

kraih wrote: post #18
hardwaresofton wrote: post #2

This is exactly what I thought would happen when I switched off of CoreOS earlier this year. I recently switched back[0] since according to their blog post[1] Container Linux would live and not be replaced by their Atomic project... I thought I was a fool for overreacting. I don't want OpenShift, it looks like a bloated clusterfuck. I don't want Atomic either -- Container Linux had all the pieces I needed and not muc…

There's also openSUSE Kubic. https://kubic.opensuse.org

That is a cool project:

* Transactional updates. No interference with the deployments. You can rollback to any previous state.

* Smart separation of /, /etc and /var, using volumes and overlays properly.

* Using RPMs! I can tailor my installation with traditional RPMs, and the result will be updated at once.

* Zero maintenance. This is kind of magic for me, you create the initial deploy and the system upgrade itself, and rollback if a problem is detected. I wonder how well this works IRL

On the downside is still a bit new, but I found more information here [1]

[1] https://kubic.opensuse.org/blog/2018-07-09-kubicatosc18/

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#38

Post by amorousf00p »

rch wrote: post #22
hardwaresofton wrote: post #2

This is exactly what I thought would happen when I switched off of CoreOS earlier this year. I recently switched back[0] since according to their blog post[1] Container Linux would live and not be replaced by their Atomic project... I thought I was a fool for overreacting. I don't want OpenShift, it looks like a bloated clusterfuck. I don't want Atomic either -- Container Linux had all the pieces I needed and not muc…

I'm not particularly fond of how OpenShift is put together, but it does seem like you're overreacting somewhat. CoreOS is pretty well aligned with Fedora, so it makes sense for it to go there organizationally. And while it's inevitable that everything in Red Hat's orbit will have a clear path to OpenShift (and probably Ansible), I'm hopeful that this won't add any noticable overhead to CoreOS/CL itself.

Fedora: Only if you really like breakage and have staff to deal with integration.

Re: Fedora CoreOS, Red Hat CoreOS, and the future of Container Linux

#40

Post by amorousf00p »

pas wrote: post #30
brightball wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I'll 2nd that. Ansible is immensely pragmatic and capable. Been very happy with it.

It's slow and hard to debug :( (at least in my experience - setting up OpenStack with it) I used to prefer Chef, but then with CoreOS the dream started to come true, just pack up everything in a container, and 12-factor configure it and that's it, and now I just can't wait for k8s to eat the world, and we'll be back full circle with helm instead of yum/apt.

Not ad-hominem but what do you know how to do? Package other peoples stuff in a config + install and then run scans against it?
Post reply on HN