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

Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

a-cup-of.coffee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#51

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

lproven wrote: post #16

It is very odd to me to watch OStree-based distros starting to take off and win recruits. The only reason Red Hat needed to invent this very complex mechanism was because RH does not officially have a COW-snapshot capable filesystem in its enterprise distro. A filesystem with snapshots makes software installation transactional. You take a snapshot, install some software, and if it doesn't work right, you can revert t…

> Btrfs is only half finished and is not robust.

Yawn. You again. Hater!1!! ;-> Mine is still running, after all these (two) years abusing it. Even with installing(not really, much more complicated) some Windoze into a subvolume of it by means of WinBtrfs. I can either boot that Windows natively, or from the same install into a VM, by means of what once were called bootmanager profiles. Automagically chosen. Without having to reserve space for NTFS, VFAT(excluding UEFI/boot), or anything else. Its just a fucking folder, like any other.

> But RH removed Btrfs from RHEL and Btrfs was the only GPL COW filesystem

There is NILFS(2) which is GPL. Lacks some features, but that could have been worked around, or implemented?

> I recall in horror and revulsion when I see it.

You have total recall of recoiling in horror? What a trip... ;-)

That aside, it's all cargo-cult anyway, because of this thing called FHS. Which seems crazy, because in a world of open-source, which can be compiled almost any way one could wish for, why not just use slashpkg, Gobolinux or similar stuff?

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#52

Post by lproven »

aaravchen wrote: post #34
lproven wrote: post #16

It is very odd to me to watch OStree-based distros starting to take off and win recruits. The only reason Red Hat needed to invent this very complex mechanism was because RH does not officially have a COW-snapshot capable filesystem in its enterprise distro. A filesystem with snapshots makes software installation transactional. You take a snapshot, install some software, and if it doesn't work right, you can revert t…

That is pretty obviously how it started, and for the very reasons you describe. But there have been some other benefits that have come out of going down this alternate path as well. In particular, the remote composability and local deployment is extremely useful for "cattle" edge system deployment. Installing a package reacts to what's currently on the system when installing. Even something as simple as the order you…

> In particular, the remote composability and local deployment is extremely useful for "cattle" edge system deployment.

A legitimate point, but I feel that there must be better, cleaner, simpler, more elegant ways of doing this.

I mean, Nix does this and it's clean in its way, but the price is, a filesystem layout that is not navigable or maintainable by humans. IMHO and that of many people, that's a price too high, but it shows that there are alternative routes.

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#53

Post by lproven »

e12e wrote: post #20
lproven wrote: post #16

It is very odd to me to watch OStree-based distros starting to take off and win recruits. The only reason Red Hat needed to invent this very complex mechanism was because RH does not officially have a COW-snapshot capable filesystem in its enterprise distro. A filesystem with snapshots makes software installation transactional. You take a snapshot, install some software, and if it doesn't work right, you can revert t…

> A filesystem with snapshots makes software installation transactional. You take a snapshot, install some software, and if it doesn't work right, you can revert to the snapshot. (With very slightly more flexible snapshots, you can limit the snapshot to just some part of the directory tree, but this is not essential; it merely permits more flexibility.) Eh, you don't typically have a lock mechanism for the filesystem…

> Don't get me wrong zfs is great - but it doesn't come with magical transactions.

I never said it did!

But if you have a snapshotting FS underneath, transactional software maintenance becomes an order or two of magnitude easier to achieve.

The underlying philosophies of Unix are "keep it in files" and "keep it simple". That's why it didn't even have a file-hiding mechanism -- the dot-file thing was an accental, emergent property.

Keep it simple, keep it visible, keep it human-readable and human-fixable.

Because the more complex you make it, the more likely it is to go wrong, and some poor sap is going to have to fix it. Do not get in their way. Instead, think about them, allow for that, and help keep their life easy.

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#54

Post by lproven »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #51
lproven wrote: post #16

It is very odd to me to watch OStree-based distros starting to take off and win recruits. The only reason Red Hat needed to invent this very complex mechanism was because RH does not officially have a COW-snapshot capable filesystem in its enterprise distro. A filesystem with snapshots makes software installation transactional. You take a snapshot, install some software, and if it doesn't work right, you can revert t…

> Btrfs is only half finished and is not robust. Yawn. You again. Hater!1!! ;-> Mine is still running, after all these (two) years abusing it. Even with installing(not really, much more complicated) some Windoze into a subvolume of it by means of WinBtrfs. I can either boot that Windows natively, or from the same install into a VM, by means of what once were called bootmanager profiles. Automagically chosen. Without…

> Yawn. You again.

Yep, me again.

You know that line from the James Bond books?

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.”

I saw Btrfs die so many times, I know what to suspect.

The official internal guidance was: give it all your disk space. Make the volumes so big that they will never fill up.

Well, if I could trust it, I might, but I know I can't trust it, so I want my data safe somewhere else. And the company wouldn't provide me with 2 or 3 disk drives so `/home` could live on another physical volume.

And once you've watched your primary work OS self-destruct again, well, if you're me, you reinstall with dual-boot so you have something else to fall back on if it happens again. As it did happen again. Repeatedly.

> You have total recall of recoiling in horror? What a trip... ;-)

OK, my bad. Brain/finger error.

> why not just use slashpkg, Gobolinux or similar stuff?

Slashpkg means DJB's thing?

https://cr.yp.to/slashpackage.html

That sounds fantastic. Thanks. I had never heard of this before.

Re Gobo -- yes please. I love that little distro.

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#55

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

lproven wrote: post #54
LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Btrfs is only half finished and is not robust. Yawn. You again. Hater!1!! ;-> Mine is still running, after all these (two) years abusing it. Even with installing(not really, much more complicated) some Windoze into a subvolume of it by means of WinBtrfs. I can either boot that Windows natively, or from the same install into a VM, by means of what once were called bootmanager profiles. Automagically chosen. Without…

> Yawn. You again. Yep, me again. You know that line from the James Bond books? “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” I saw Btrfs die so many times, I know what to suspect. The official internal guidance was: give it all your disk space. Make the volumes so big that they will never fill up. Well, if I could trust it, I might, but I know I can't trust it, so I want my data safe som…

> DJB' thing.

Yes. It's looking a little bit abandoned, but there is more to it than that single URL.

Maybe a dozen small sites, globally, collecting 'recipes', and still very incomplete.

Partial overlap with hardcore refuseniks who prefer different init-systems, libc's and building whole mini-distros around other concepts. Starting and running f...ing fast.

Yes, in containers/VM's too.

Since you are a writer, you could create some nice stories about the different systems-universes, which could have been if only... ;-)

Which also could help with your PTSD regarding Btrfs, which you DO suffer from.

Lemme tell you why that is from my POV:

I didn't use it in it's early days. So whatever imperfections of its code and tools, or interactions with kernels/libraries of that time escaped me.

I tortured it by pulling the power plug of the systems it's running on multiple times, under different conditions. Like from mostly idling to extreme load. Dozens of times, meanwhile. Sometimes full to the brim. I'm using it on everything, ranging from internal SATA-SSD, NVME, and external disks(real rotating rust) even over f...ing USB2 with UASP. Even using some compression, no DEDUP or RAID though. Still nothing bad ever happened.

Maybe because I'm using it on a 'gaming-distro', often considered b0rkn by 'professionals? Shrug?

So whenever I'm seeing you rambling about that stuff, that's what you'll get from me:

Shrug?

(Until it happens to me, then I'll shout I repent! I repent! Such brazen foolishness of mine! Forgive my ignorance!)

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#56

Post by lproven »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #55
lproven wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yawn. You again. Yep, me again. You know that line from the James Bond books? “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” I saw Btrfs die so many times, I know what to suspect. The official internal guidance was: give it all your disk space. Make the volumes so big that they will never fill up. Well, if I could trust it, I might, but I know I can't trust it, so I want my data safe som…

> DJB' thing. Yes. It's looking a little bit abandoned, but there is more to it than that single URL. Maybe a dozen small sites, globally, collecting 'recipes', and still very incomplete. Partial overlap with hardcore refuseniks who prefer different init-systems, libc's and building whole mini-distros around other concepts . Starting and running f...ing fast. Yes, in containers/VM's too. Since you are a writer, you c…

> Maybe because I'm using it on a 'gaming-distro'

Bazzite or something?

So, no Snapper. So, no background OS component writing to the root volume.

So, you are not affected by the problem I describe and have documented at length.

As a result you think I am lying.

Seems to me you're unable to follow a chain of reasoning.

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#57

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

lproven wrote: post #56
LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DJB' thing. Yes. It's looking a little bit abandoned, but there is more to it than that single URL. Maybe a dozen small sites, globally, collecting 'recipes', and still very incomplete. Partial overlap with hardcore refuseniks who prefer different init-systems, libc's and building whole mini-distros around other concepts . Starting and running f...ing fast. Yes, in containers/VM's too. Since you are a writer, you c…

> Maybe because I'm using it on a 'gaming-distro' Bazzite or something? So, no Snapper. So, no background OS component writing to the root volume. So, you are not affected by the problem I describe and have documented at length. As a result you think I am lying. Seems to me you're unable to follow a chain of reasoning.

Err, no. CachyOS. Initially with snapper, and it's still installed, but any automagicals disabled. As are the pacman hooks using it. Because I have no real need for them, and the potential hassle they can cause(If you do letting them run into oblivion). Btrfs has other, very convenient qualites.

My reasoning is you can perfectly use it, while having the ability to do manual snapshots, if you think you must, which I don't, because I(usually) know what and how to do. But not like you did use it.

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#59

Post by nicman23 »

okanat wrote: post #42
nicman23 wrote: post #23

developers will do anything but to use a cow fs

You cannot replicate the full filesystem among multiple hosts with their own drives though, can you? With OSTree my team can deploy a commit over an existing ones to a field of 60k embedded Linux devices. Similarly bootc is a great alternative for deploying images for dedicated or virtualized servers.

yeah you can? what you on about

Re: Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment

#60

Post by lproven »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #57
lproven wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe because I'm using it on a 'gaming-distro' Bazzite or something? So, no Snapper. So, no background OS component writing to the root volume. So, you are not affected by the problem I describe and have documented at length. As a result you think I am lying. Seems to me you're unable to follow a chain of reasoning.

Err, no. CachyOS. Initially with snapper, and it's still installed, but any automagicals disabled. As are the pacman hooks using it. Because I have no real need for them, and the potential hassle they can cause(If you do letting them run into oblivion). Btrfs has other, very convenient qualites. My reasoning is you can perfectly use it, while having the ability to do manual snapshots, if you think you must, which I d…

Fair enough.

I tried it, twice.

2024...

https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/23/cachyos_arch_linux/

2025...

https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/20/cachyos_distrowatch/

It's fine but it does nothing I especially want or need. Alpine is faster, for instance.

Post reply on HN