Skip to content
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

Add a doc for container provisioning and updates #540

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
127 changes: 127 additions & 0 deletions modules/ROOT/pages/deriving-container.adoc
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be linked from the nav tree? Not sure where it'd belong... Going along with the experimental labeling comment, maybe easiest is to have a new "Experimental features" parent with this as the first child?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What would you consider experimental about this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or, to flip it around - in your view, what would be the criteria to "graduate"?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It just doesn't seem to me like we've worked through all the details. Container layering impacts multiple parts of FCOS we're deeply opinionated about. We started on this in e.g. coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#1219 and coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#1263 but then... fires happened.

At a minimum, I think we should resolve coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#1263. But also, I think we would need a larger rework of what tests we run and how the docs are structured so it's properly integrated in our provisioning and configuration story. (But ideally, we also introduce a better UX for this stuff.)

How about something like this near the top:

NOTE: Container layering is a new approach to provisioning and configuring Fedora CoreOS. The underlying features are considered stable, but its integration into Fedora CoreOS are subject to change and nodes may in the future require reprovisioning. Note that in this mode, automatic updates are not directly managed by the Fedora CoreOS team and rely on user-managed services.

?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It just doesn't seem to me like we've worked through all the details.

Yeah but, speaking bluntly I feel like that's not going to happen unless I keep pushing it, hence this PR.

At a minimum, I think we should resolve coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#1263.

OK, I have my opinion written there.

but also, I think we would need a larger rework of what tests we run

That's true, filed coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#1484

But ideally, we also introduce a better UX for this stuff.)

That's partly in coreos/butane#428

and nodes may in the future require reprovisioning.

Mmmm. I guess that's a pivotal decision here. I am not forseeing any changes which would require reprovisioning. Are you?

Note that in this mode, autom1tic updates are not directly managed by the Fedora CoreOS team and rely on user-managed services.

This part is covered below there too, but sure we can emphasize it. I tossed up this page in https://hackmd.io/QM1V-FujTmalikgi5JQHPw to avoid round trips.
(yeah it's not actually markdown sadly, but I'm just using it as a realtime editor)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It just doesn't seem to me like we've worked through all the details.

Yeah but, speaking bluntly I feel like that's not going to happen unless I keep pushing it, hence this PR.

You're welcome to help work through the details, too. 🙂

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, I added a note to the top here which covers what is IMO the top last issue we considered "blocking" around the barriers. It's just up front about that outstanding bug, but I'm hopeful we'll have more infrastructure there by the time we see the need for another barrier.

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
= Deriving from Fedora CoreOS as a bootable container image

NOTICE: At the current time, the suggested model here does not integrate with the current "update barriers" model used for default Fedora CoreOS updates. While relatively rare so far, this means that some container-based updates may see issues that were otherwise gated. This issue is being worked on. More information in https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1263[this issue].

== Bootable containers overview

The operating system images used for Fedora CoreOS are available as a standard container image; there is one per stream. See xref:update-streams.adoc[Update Streams].

- quay.io/fedora/fedora-coreos:stable
- quay.io/fedora/fedora-coreos:next
cgwalters marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- quay.io/fedora/fedora-coreos:testing

== Creating custom builds

See the https://github.com/coreos/layering-examples[layering examples] git repository. While the examples there tend to use Containerfile/Dockerfile style builds, you can use any tool which can build containers and push the result to a registry.

The default suggested approach is to have container tags be the source of truth for initating upgrades, and to have the client systems poll. Example systemd units for this are in [https://github.com/coreos/layering-examples/tree/main/autoupdate-host]; they boil down to a systemd `.service` which just runs `rpm-ostree upgrade --reboot` and a corresponding `.timer` unit to run it once a day.

Of course, client side logic could be much more complex, including a privileged container image that runs completely arbitrary logic.

== Using Ignition to switch to a bootable container image

The https://coreos.github.io/rpm-ostree/container/[rpm-ostree container page] describes the commands for interacting with bootable ostree container images.

This systemd unit will run only on the first boot, and switch a "stock" Fedora CoreOS node to your custom image.

[source,yaml]
----
variant: fcos
version: 1.4.0
systemd:
units:
# Our custom unit for rebasing
- name: rebase-custom.service
enabled: true
contents: |
[Unit]
Description=Fetch and deploy target image
# Only run on the firstboot
ConditionFirstBoot=true
After=network-online.target
[Service]
# This ordering is important
After=ignition-firstboot-complete.service

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is now coreos-ignition-firstboot-complete.service

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

image

From

[core@forgejo-actionsrunner ~]$ cat /etc/os-release 
NAME="Fedora Linux"
VERSION="39.20240210.3.0 (CoreOS)"
ID=fedora
VERSION_ID=39

Type=oneshot
RemainAfterExit=yes
ExecStart=rpm-ostree rebase --reboot ostree-unverified-registry:quay.io/example/example-derived:latest
[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
----

== Adding pull secrets for private container images

If your registry requires authentication, then you can add a pull secret. See https://coreos.github.io/rpm-ostree/container/#registry-authentication[container pull secrets].

[source,yaml]
----
variant: fcos
version: 1.4.0
storage:
files:
- path: /etc/ostree/auth.json
mode: 0600
contents:
inline: >
{
"auths": {
"quay.io": {
"auth": "..."
}
}
}
----

== Maintaining custom builds

As the upstream container image (e.g. quay.io/fedora/fedora-coreos:stable) changes for security and functionality improvements, you are responsible for re-building your derived image. Implementing this depends on your chosen container build system.

However, key to this model is the assumption that if you're deploying Fedora CoreOS, you have already invested in container infrastructure and can manage the operating system updates in the same way as application containers.

== Understanding Ignition versus container content

=== Storage

First, if you wish to configure storage (see xref:storage.adoc[Configuring Storage] ) that must still be done via the initial Ignition configuration.
If you wish to change a system's storage configuration, the current recommendation is still that that be done via full system reprovisioning.

=== Filesystem

Ignition's philosophy is that it runs exactly once, and any subsequent changes should generally be done by node reprovisioning. This can
be very expensive in some environments. Storing configuration directly
with the OS content allows strongly coupling them and ensuring that
the state of your machines is exactly what you build and replicate
as a container image.

Note however that content injected via Ignition will still persist as
machine-local state into subsequent OS updates (including by default
our unit to perform the switch, which will remain inactive; though your
container could run code to delete or mask the unit).

=== Machine local state

A powerful ability of using OCI containers as a mechanism for host
systems management is that one can create chains of derived images;
for example, you might have a "base" image derived from Fedora CoreOS
that include e.g. basic agents or logging configuration, but then further builds
that customize that base for particular sites or cloud environments.

It's even possible to create builds which are targeted solely for
a specific machine.

However, this may not always be ergonomic to do. Ignition here
can serve as a mechanism to apply machine-specific state. Commonly,
this machine specific state does not need to change often. A classic
example here is configuring `/etc/hostname`.

=== Bootstrap configuration to fetch container images

The pull secret described above is also a form of configuration on
the system that must be present (in some environments) to pull the container
image, and hence must be configured via Ignition today.

==== Machine local bootstrap configuration

There is a class of configuration which combines these two previous types,
such as static IP addressing. Here, Ignition again makes sense
to perform this configuration.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion modules/ROOT/pages/getting-started.adoc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Fedora CoreOS does not have a separate install disk. Instead, every instance sta

Each platform has specific logic to retrieve and apply the first boot configuration. For cloud deployments, Ignition gathers the configuration via user-data mechanisms. In the case of bare metal, Ignition can fetch its configuration from the disk or from a remote source.

For more information on configuration, refer to the documentation for xref:producing-ign.adoc[Producing an Ignition File].
For more information on configuration, refer to the documentation for xref:producing-ign.adoc[Producing an Ignition File]. There is also the ability to derive from the container base image, see xref:deriving-container.adoc[Booting a derived container image].

== Quickstart

Expand Down