Re: s2i-base ancestry

[Ben Parees]

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Dale Bewley  wrote:

>
>
> - On Aug 28, 2016, at 9:28 PM, Ben Parees  wrote:
>
> https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/tree/master/rhel7.s2i-base is
> the future, so you should go off that, which as you noted generates
> registry.access.redhat.com/rhscl/s2i-base-rhel7
>
> Some existing s2i rhel images are still based on
> https://github.com/openshift/s2i-base however.
>
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> I see https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/blob/master/
> rhel7.s2i-base/Dockerfile has `FROM rhel:7.2-released`
>
> I do not see a  `7.2-released` tag on the rhel image, but I assume it is
> the same image as `rhel:7.2` but on an internal registry perhaps?
>

​yes it should be equivalent, you'll notice some of the other rhel7 images
use the rhel7.2 image repo directly as well:
https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/blob/master/centos7.mysql55/Dockerfile.rhel7
​
you should be ok using either rhel:7.2 or rhel7.2, they appear to be
identical:

registry.access.redhat.com/rhel7.2
latest  98a88a8b722a12 days ago 201.4 MB
registry.access.redhat.com/rhel
7.2 98a88a8b722a12 days ago 201.4 MB



> $ curl -s https://registry.access.redhat.com/v1/repositories/rhel/tags |
> jq .
> {
>   "6.7": "0701b067a2960e22357a373f8d53ac2ad12547e2c19d49750b9af4401167
> b70d",
>   "6.7-35": "fb7b495fd705c9e9bbbd17b893f9937957c6d6d94ea311d5494658dff86b
> 4ac2",
>   "6.7-51": "0701b067a2960e22357a373f8d53ac2ad12547e2c19d49750b9af4401167
> b70d",
>   "6.8": "59d5a49b0f75c6f78a3673368cb76976ec89a5f020026f43fc99572d48ea
> 936b",
>   "6.8-101": "59d5a49b0f75c6f78a3673368cb76976ec89a5f020026f43fc99572d48ea
> 936b",
>   "7.0-21": "e1f5733f050b2488a17b7630cb038bfbea8b7bdfa9bdfb99e63a33117e28
> d02f",
>   "7.0-23": "bef54b8f8a2fdd221734f1da404d4c0a7d07ee9169b1443a338ab54236c8
> c91a",
>   "7.0-27": "8e6704f39a3d4a0c82ec7262ad683a9d1d9a281e3c1ebbb64c045b9af39b
> 3940",
>   "7.1-11": "d0a516b529ab1adda28429cae5985cab9db93bfd8d301b3a94d22299af72
> 914b",
>   "7.1-12": "275be1d3d0709a06ff1ae38d0d5402bc8f0eeac44812e5ec1df4a9e99214
> eb9a",
>   "7.1-16": "82ad5fa11820c2889c60f7f748d67aab04400700c581843db0d1e6873532
> 7443",
>   "7.1-24": "c4f590bbcbe329a77c00fea33a3a960063072041489012061ec3a134baba
> 50d6",
>   "7.1-4": "10acc31def5d6f249b548e01e8ffbaccfd61af0240c17315a7ad393d022c
> 5ca2",
>   "7.1-6": "65de4a13fc7cf28b4376e65efa31c5c3805e18da4eb01ad0c8b8801f4a10
> bc16",
>   "7.1-9": "e3c92c6cff3543d19d0c9a24c72cd3840f8ba3ee00357f997b786e8939ef
> ef2f",
>   "7.2": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94
> eaaf",
>   "7.2-104": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94
> eaaf",
>   "7.2-35": "6883d5422f4ec2810e1312c0e3e5a902142e2a8185cd3a1124b459a7c38d
> c55b",
>   "7.2-38": "6c3a84d798dc449313787502060b6d5b4694d7527d64a7c99ba199e3b2df
> 834e",
>   "7.2-43": "07e361a1cd7cae70df4c585c2dbeceb25e069a01911c15a5d70d499eacd0
> 53ce",
>   "7.2-44": "18c92348de3686dfc369b5acd799b0538b54072279a130f56688510f6e6f
> 9828",
>   "7.2-46": "bf63a676257aeb7a75a6bbbda138398bbaf223ab34fe9d169e458f9b3990
> 04ef",
>   "7.2-56": "95612a3264fcea256ed7c179d6e4a5dece55e217cff198bbaeb4a7e554f9
> 74ca",
>   "7.2-61": "c453594215e4370541ba0a2a238c9429026de1d1deedf5e5b7442778e428
> c60f",
>   "7.2-75": "885f7095eac8364d76d110f7a886974f12a4aeef7a03721bda49c8947f49
> 92ce",
>   "7.2-84": "6f7a31562d1ec723b2b025c8cf040fd6c0e74cb14fd0abdbd1a9b0dee5dd
> 19f6",
>   "latest": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94
> eaaf"
> }
>
> Is it possible to see the Dockerfile for rhel:7.2-released?
>
>
>
> Note that there's no requirement your s2i image use that base image.  If
> you find it convenient, great, but its primary purpose is to serve as a
> common base for the existing suite of SCL-based s2i images, its use as a
> general base for s2i images is a secondary goal (meaning if it does not
> serve your purposes, requests for enhancement will be considered in the
> context of the primary goal).
>
> Understood. My goal is to customize as little as possible and make it as
> likely as possible that developers take advantage of your releases by way
> of imagechange triggers following my builder images which have imagechange
> triggers following your builder images. To accomplish this, I'm using
> buildconfigs inside OpenShift for my builder images instead of the s2i
> command line tool.
>

​sounds like the right approach.​



>
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Dale Bewley  wrote:
>
>>
>> Where does the OpenShift Enterprise s2i-base image come from?
>>
>> A. https://github.com/openshift/s2i-base or
>> B. https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/tree/master/rhel7.s2i-base
>>
>> Repo A builds FROM rhel7.2 and seems to create
>> registry.access.redhat.com/openshift3/sti-base
>> Repo B builds FROM rhel:7.2-released and seems to create
>> 

Re: s2i-base ancestry

[Dale Bewley]

- On Aug 28, 2016, at 9:28 PM, Ben Parees  wrote: 

> https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/tree/master/rhel7.s2i-base is the
> future, so you should go off that, which as you noted generates
> registry.access.redhat.com/rhscl/s2i-base-rhel7

> Some existing s2i rhel images are still based on
> https://github.com/openshift/s2i-base however.

Thanks for the explanation. 

I see 
https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/blob/master/rhel7.s2i-base/Dockerfile
 has `FROM rhel:7.2-released` 

I do not see a `7.2-released` tag on the rhel image, but I assume it is the 
same image as `rhel:7.2` but on an internal registry perhaps? 

$ curl -s https://registry.access.redhat.com/v1/repositories/rhel/tags | jq . 
{ 
"6.7": "0701b067a2960e22357a373f8d53ac2ad12547e2c19d49750b9af4401167b70d", 
"6.7-35": "fb7b495fd705c9e9bbbd17b893f9937957c6d6d94ea311d5494658dff86b4ac2", 
"6.7-51": "0701b067a2960e22357a373f8d53ac2ad12547e2c19d49750b9af4401167b70d", 
"6.8": "59d5a49b0f75c6f78a3673368cb76976ec89a5f020026f43fc99572d48ea936b", 
"6.8-101": "59d5a49b0f75c6f78a3673368cb76976ec89a5f020026f43fc99572d48ea936b", 
"7.0-21": "e1f5733f050b2488a17b7630cb038bfbea8b7bdfa9bdfb99e63a33117e28d02f", 
"7.0-23": "bef54b8f8a2fdd221734f1da404d4c0a7d07ee9169b1443a338ab54236c8c91a", 
"7.0-27": "8e6704f39a3d4a0c82ec7262ad683a9d1d9a281e3c1ebbb64c045b9af39b3940", 
"7.1-11": "d0a516b529ab1adda28429cae5985cab9db93bfd8d301b3a94d22299af72914b", 
"7.1-12": "275be1d3d0709a06ff1ae38d0d5402bc8f0eeac44812e5ec1df4a9e99214eb9a", 
"7.1-16": "82ad5fa11820c2889c60f7f748d67aab04400700c581843db0d1e68735327443", 
"7.1-24": "c4f590bbcbe329a77c00fea33a3a960063072041489012061ec3a134baba50d6", 
"7.1-4": "10acc31def5d6f249b548e01e8ffbaccfd61af0240c17315a7ad393d022c5ca2", 
"7.1-6": "65de4a13fc7cf28b4376e65efa31c5c3805e18da4eb01ad0c8b8801f4a10bc16", 
"7.1-9": "e3c92c6cff3543d19d0c9a24c72cd3840f8ba3ee00357f997b786e8939efef2f", 
"7.2": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94eaaf", 
"7.2-104": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94eaaf", 
"7.2-35": "6883d5422f4ec2810e1312c0e3e5a902142e2a8185cd3a1124b459a7c38dc55b", 
"7.2-38": "6c3a84d798dc449313787502060b6d5b4694d7527d64a7c99ba199e3b2df834e", 
"7.2-43": "07e361a1cd7cae70df4c585c2dbeceb25e069a01911c15a5d70d499eacd053ce", 
"7.2-44": "18c92348de3686dfc369b5acd799b0538b54072279a130f56688510f6e6f9828", 
"7.2-46": "bf63a676257aeb7a75a6bbbda138398bbaf223ab34fe9d169e458f9b399004ef", 
"7.2-56": "95612a3264fcea256ed7c179d6e4a5dece55e217cff198bbaeb4a7e554f974ca", 
"7.2-61": "c453594215e4370541ba0a2a238c9429026de1d1deedf5e5b7442778e428c60f", 
"7.2-75": "885f7095eac8364d76d110f7a886974f12a4aeef7a03721bda49c8947f4992ce", 
"7.2-84": "6f7a31562d1ec723b2b025c8cf040fd6c0e74cb14fd0abdbd1a9b0dee5dd19f6", 
"latest": "aec95d6d92873ac6bc966d4fb6e97cd5a9e4da5e53e91478078557a7dc94eaaf" 
} 

Is it possible to see the Dockerfile for rhel:7.2-released? 

> Note that there's no requirement your s2i image use that base image. If you 
> find
> it convenient, great, but its primary purpose is to serve as a common base for
> the existing suite of SCL-based s2i images, its use as a general base for s2i
> images is a secondary goal (meaning if it does not serve your purposes,
> requests for enhancement will be considered in the context of the primary
> goal).

Understood. My goal is to customize as little as possible and make it as likely 
as possible that developers take advantage of your releases by way of 
imagechange triggers following my builder images which have imagechange 
triggers following your builder images. To accomplish this, I'm using 
buildconfigs inside OpenShift for my builder images instead of the s2i command 
line tool. 

> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Dale Bewley < d...@bewley.net > wrote:

>> Where does the OpenShift Enterprise s2i-base image come from?

>> A. https://github.com/openshift/s2i-base or
>> B. https://github.com/sclorg/rhscl-dockerfiles/tree/master/rhel7.s2i-base

>> Repo A builds FROM rhel7.2 and seems to create
>> registry.access.redhat.com/openshift3/sti-base
>> Repo B builds FROM rhel:7.2-released and seems to create
>> registry.access.redhat.com/rhscl/s2i-base-rhel7

>> I see s2i-python repo has been renamed to
>> https://github.com/sclorg/s2i-python-container
>> but it doesn't use either. It builds FROM openshift/base-rhel7.

>> Is there a direct lineage that can be followed? Sclorg seems to own all the 
>> s2i
>> now, but at what point do images enter the openshift part of the registry?

>> What should I model a custom s2i on?

>> Thanks

>> ___
>> users mailing list
>> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com
>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users

> --
> Ben Parees | OpenShift
___
users mailing list
users@lists.openshift.redhat.com
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users