On 5/26/20 9:26 PM, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:29:17AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: >>> The images have 700-800MB of space used, which is still three times the >>> size of the qcow2 file. Why do you refuse to use what's already there? >> >> I already explained: because downloading from ADSL, extracting, then >> re-uploading to a cloud provider, is a stupid way of doing things, when >> one could just point to the URL of the artifact and let the cloud >> provider do the download. > > Yes, but you point it to the _qcow2_ image. Which, for generic, is > about 250-300MB in size, as it is somewhat compressed, and can be read > by all the OpenStack tools. > > (Fun fact: even the OpenStack provided tool to generate the Octavia > images does qcow2 by default.) > [https://docs.openstack.org/octavia/latest/admin/amphora-image-build.html] > >> Also, as I wrote earlier, it's not 700-800MB, but less than 512MB, and >> we could reduce the size of the raw images to that. > > Please show me this existing 512MB image you are talking about. At > least right now it does not exist. The build log currently even clearly > states how much space is used.
Sure! The latest genericcloud bullseye daily image: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/cloud/bullseye/daily/20200527-276/debian-11-genericcloud-amd64-daily-20200527-276.tar.xz Though *BULLSHIT*, it's actually only a 507 MB sparse file, not even a 512 MB one ... :) Even if it was around 700-800MB, that doesn't change my point, which is the 2GB resulting image is still too big and could be less than half its current size. > At the last sprint we talked about how minimal the image should be. The > majority wanted to have more tools in it. Yeah, and I'm still on that side. That doesn't change anything to what I'm talking about either. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
