-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 296
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
extensible metadata on deployments #3032
Comments
BTW if we do this we should also teach the OpenShift MCO to do this, to describe which rendered configs it used for the deployment. |
One thought related to this is that with composefs, we automatically gain a new |
(And maybe we should just turn on composefs generation unconditionally by default?) |
we discussed turning composefs for Fedora ELN first. |
One thing that happened with #3114 is we gained a whole new directory created unconditionally now - so we can trivially drop in a new file there in whatever format we want (but probably gvariant) or xattrs on that directory. |
This one also tangentially relates to https://systemd.io/AUTOMATIC_BOOT_ASSESSMENT/ as the success/failure of a boot is something that could make sense here - or in the bootloader configs. |
I see that is targeted for
Then the process described in the Walkthrough section of https://systemd.io/AUTOMATIC_BOOT_ASSESSMENT/ will take over. We can embed additional information on |
I think for this the source of truth is the bootloader entry, same with ostree.
I think these are the same things? The OS builder wants a way to opt-in to boot counting.
This part seems right to me; basically ostree shouldn't care what the contents of the filename is today, so we can add the retry and then our equivalent of systemd-bless-boot.service can update the count. Something like greenboot (or part of the initrd?) would need to decrement the counter at boot. Another thing we could do here is do the work to test this w/systemd boot, then port to greenboot/grub. |
As far as metadata associated with a deployment, one thing I could imagine is that we add a generic There's e.g. these recommendations for extending os-release but nothing similar there. |
As prep for #2725 but also in general, I think it'd be useful to have an official "metadata" API for deployments - surfacing things like "did this deployment boot before" in a way indepdenent of the journal.
I think this could be a pretty thin wrapper for extended attributes on the deployment root directory. (Need to verify whether the immutable bit breaks this; if it does we could just document using the origin file for this)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: