[BlueOnyx:23853] Re: source code of the bootable iso

[Michael Stauber]

Hi Tomohiro Hosaka,

>> https://www.blueonyx.it/easy-migrate
> 
> Yes, I have already tried. Great tool!

Very well. Thank you!

> I created a similar perl script at $work many years ago to move vsites
> between bluequartz.
>
> When I glanced at the source code, I felt a deja vu.
>
> Net::OpenSSH is a very good library.
> I use it for many other purposes.

Yeah, it's really nice and for projects like this where you have to
repeatedly make SSH/SCP/RSYNC calls it's a big time savior. I did have
to make a few calls outside of Net::OpenSSH, though, as I was running
into some limitations. But overall it's a great library.

>> I'll try to have that ready for you within the next 1-2 days. I wanted
>> to do an updated 5209R ISO anyway as the last one is from March this year.
> 
> Oh my god! I'm so happy I could cry!

I'm glad to hear that. Here is the URL to the updated 5209R ISO:

https://devel.blueonyx.it/pub/BlueOnyx/ISO/BlueOnyx-5209R-CentOS-7.8-20200520.iso

When you use it you'll see a new boot option that allows you to use
"HD-Autodetect EXT4" and it'll then install with EXT4 instead of
XFS-partitions.

> Furthermore, if `reboot` becomes `systemctl restart`, would it be
> possible to make a dockerfile in the future...

I thought about that and I'm not sure if it's a route I want to pursue.
Sure, changing /sbin/reboot to "systemctl restart" is no big deal and I
could easily do that.

No, I mean pursuing Docker. It appears like a dying breed and the recent
change in ownership might drive the final nail into that coffin. There
is also Podman (RedHat's fork of Docker), there are Snaps (which I hate
with a passion!) and other competing containerized approaches.

At the end of the day it's much fewer hassles to get BlueOnyx to run in
a somewhat more "real" container such as under OpenVZ (which we fully
support since day one of BlueOnyx) or under LXC/LXD.

> I tried the 5210R over half a year ago.
>
> The installation was fine, but I encountered a few issues and
> decided to adopt the 5209R.
>
> I remember that one of them was that I couldn't login with ssh.
> I think it's resolved now.

Yeah, 5210R had a bit of a rough start and the many design changes in
CentOS 8 (not all to the better) didn't help either. But these issues
have been mostly ironed out and there are only 2-3 more small issues on
my to-do list for 5210R. None of them being critical.

But continuing to use 5209R is fine, as it still has lots of life left
in it.

-- 
With best regards

Michael Stauber