On 25/07/16 at 16:32 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 07/20/2016 12:03 PM, gustavo panizzo (gfa) wrote: > > I don't mind if there is a task/metapkg called "EC2-optimal", > > "OpenStack-Optimized", whatever. but the default image on each cloud > > provider should be as close as possible to debian installed from d-i. > > We've discussed that during the cloud-BoF in Cape Town, and that's not > what I heard. For example, I asked about having "nano", which comes by > default if using d-i. It is my view it should be there. The same way, a > few utilities are helpful in the cloud context, for example GNU-screen. > To this date, I have gathered no consensus. The only one that I found is > that we could do a minimal and a "full" cloud image, which probably we > could do, but IMO, everyone has a different idea of what the "full" > image should look like.
On 25/07/16 at 10:42 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > In fact, I think there was a consensus in the room in Cape Town that we > very much did not want something as close to what d-i produces, but > instead wanted something that was minimal. I'm surprised that this hasn't been mentioned during the BOF: I think that the correct way to solve the problem of "what to put into the image" would be to rely on packages Priority: fields. By default, debootstrap creates a chroot with everything Priority: important and higher. If you add the kernel, ssh and cloud-init, you get what could probably be a "minimal" installation. (that includes nano, FYI) The main benefit of relying solely on priorities is that, if they are wrong, we can fix it and improve Debian as a whole. Lucas
