From Fedora Project Wiki
(Created page with " {{admon/tip | Guidance | For details on how to fill out this form, see the [https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/changes_guide/ documentation].}} <!-- The actual name of your proposed change page should look something like: Changes/Your_Change_Proposal_Name. This keeps all change proposals in the same namespace --> = Build Fedora IoT using rpm-ostree unified core mode = {{Change_Proposal_Banner}} == Summary == rpm-ostree upstream development is f...")
 
No edit summary
Line 49: Line 49:


== Benefit to Fedora ==
== Benefit to Fedora ==
<!-- What is the benefit to the distribution?  Will the software we generate be improved? How will the process of creating Fedora releases be improved?
The old mode in rpm-ostree is not maintained anymore and less tested thus more prone to bugs. Moving to the new mode will unify IoT with that is used to build Fedora CoreOS and that receives a lot of testing. This will remove maintenance burden on the rpm-ostree project as they will thus be able to remove the old code. The new mode also makes composes work the same on the server side and the client side and makes them safer by more strictly confining scriptlets execution.
 
      Be sure to include the following areas if relevant:
      If this is a major capability update, what has changed?
          For example: This change introduces Python 5 that runs without the Global Interpreter Lock and is fully multithreaded.
      If this is a new functionality, what capabilities does it bring?
          For example: This change allows package upgrades to be performed automatically and rolled-back at will.
      Does this improve some specific package or set of packages?
          For example: This change modifies a package to use a different language stack that reduces install size by removing dependencies.
      Does this improve specific Spins or Editions?
          For example: This change modifies the default install of Fedora Workstation to be more in line with the base install of Fedora Server.
      Does this make the distribution more efficient?
          For example: This change replaces thousands of individual %post scriptlets in packages with one script that runs at the end.
      Is this an improvement to maintainer processes?
          For example: Gating Fedora packages on automatic QA tests will make rawhide more stable and allow changes to be implemented more smoothly.
      Is this an improvement targeted as specific contributors?
          For example: Ensuring that a minimal set of tools required for contribution to Fedora are installed by default eases the onboarding of new contributors.
 
    When a Change has multiple benefits, it's better to list them all.
 
    Consider these Change pages from previous editions as inspiration:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Annobin (low-level and technical, invisible to users)
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo (low-level, but visible to advanced users)
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/VirtualBox_Guest_Integration (primarily a UX change)
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoMoreAlpha (an improvement to distro processes)
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/perl5.26 (major upgrade to a popular software stack, visible to users of that stack)
-->


== Scope ==
== Scope ==
Line 98: Line 72:


== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
<!-- What happens to systems that have had a previous versions of Fedora installed and are updated to the version containing this change? Will anything require manual configuration or data migration? Will any existing functionality be no longer supported? -->
* There will be no impact to end users, upgrades will work the same as previous releases
 
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
 


== How To Test ==
== How To Test ==
<!-- This does not need to be a full-fledged document. Describe the dimensions of tests that this change implementation is expected to pass when it is done.  If it needs to be tested with different hardware or software configurations, indicate them.  The more specific you can be, the better the community testing can be.
* Upgrade to Fedora 40 IoT Edition
 
Remember that you are writing this how to for interested testers to use to check out your change implementation - documenting what you do for testing is OK, but it's much better to document what *I* can do to test your change.
 
A good "how to test" should answer these four questions:
 
0. What special hardware / data / etc. is needed (if any)?
1. How do I prepare my system to test this change? What packages
need to be installed, config files edited, etc.?
2. What specific actions do I perform to check that the change is
working like it's supposed to?
3. What are the expected results of those actions?
-->
 
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
 


== User Experience ==
== User Experience ==
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result?
* There will be no impact to users.  
 
This section partially overlaps with the Benefit to Fedora section above. This section should be primarily about the User Experience, written in a way that does not assume deep technical knowledge. More detailed technical description should be left for the Benefit to Fedora section.
 
Describe what Users will see or notice, for example:
  - Packages are compressed more efficiently, making downloads and upgrades faster by 10%.
  - Kerberos tickets can be renewed automatically. Users will now have to authenticate less and become more productive. Credential management improvements mean a user can start their work day with a single sign on and not have to pause for reauthentication during their entire day.
- Libreoffice is one of the most commonly installed applications on Fedora and it is now available by default to help users "hit the ground running".
- Green has been scientifically proven to be the most relaxing color. The move to a default background color of green with green text will result in Fedora users being the most relaxed users of any operating system.
-->


== Dependencies ==
== Dependencies ==
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package?  Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends?  In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate?  Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? -->
N/A
 
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
 


== Contingency Plan ==
== Contingency Plan ==
 
* Contingency mechanism: Revert to older non-unified core mode.  
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan?  This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration".  Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages).  If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy.  -->
* Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do?  Who will do it?) N/A (not a System Wide Change)  <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change)
<!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place?  This will typically be the beta freeze. -->
* Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change) <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? -->
* Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change), Yes/No <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
 


== Documentation ==
== Documentation ==
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this change, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
N/A (not a System Wide Change)  
N/A (not a System Wide Change)  


== Release Notes ==
== Release Notes ==
<!-- The Fedora Release Notes inform end-users about what is new in the release.  Examples of past release notes are at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/ -->
N/A
<!-- The release notes also help users know how to deal with platform changes such as ABIs/APIs, configuration or data file formats, or upgrade concerns.  If there are any such changes involved in this change, indicate them here.  A link to upstream documentation will often satisfy this need.  This information forms the basis of the release notes edited by the documentation team and shipped with the release.
 
Release Notes are not required for initial draft of the Change Proposal but has to be completed by the Change Freeze.
-->

Revision as of 22:54, 29 November 2023

Idea.png
Guidance
For details on how to fill out this form, see the documentation.


Build Fedora IoT using rpm-ostree unified core mode

Important.png
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.

Summary

rpm-ostree upstream development is focusing on the "unified core" mode and the previous mode is being deprecated. Fedora IoT is currently building using the old mode and we've wanted to move over for a while. The main advantage of the unified core mode is that it is stricter and safer, while enabling some post processing steps to happen during or after the image build.

Owner

Current status

  • Targeted release: Fedora Linux 40
  • Last updated: 2023-11-29
  • [<will be assigned by the Wrangler> devel thread]
  • FESCo issue: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Release notes tracker: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>

Detailed Description

For more details about the difference between the two modes, you can read the upstream issue: https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/issues/729. See also the history in https://pagure.io/workstation-ostree-config/issue/137.

On top of the advantages listed above, we need unified core support to be able to add bootupd integration to Fedora IoT and to align with other ostree editions in Fedora.

Feedback

Benefit to Fedora

The old mode in rpm-ostree is not maintained anymore and less tested thus more prone to bugs. Moving to the new mode will unify IoT with that is used to build Fedora CoreOS and that receives a lot of testing. This will remove maintenance burden on the rpm-ostree project as they will thus be able to remove the old code. The new mode also makes composes work the same on the server side and the client side and makes them safer by more strictly confining scriptlets execution.

Scope

  • Proposal owners:
  • Other developers:
  • Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
  • Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
  • Alignment with Community Initiatives:

Upgrade/compatibility impact

  • There will be no impact to end users, upgrades will work the same as previous releases

How To Test

  • Upgrade to Fedora 40 IoT Edition

User Experience

  • There will be no impact to users.

Dependencies

N/A

Contingency Plan

  • Contingency mechanism: Revert to older non-unified core mode.
  • Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
  • Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change)

Documentation

N/A (not a System Wide Change)

Release Notes

N/A