Advantages of bootc over rpm-ostree

[vitamin (D Vitamin)]

There were already some discussions before:

Documentation for OSTree Native Container migration?

With F41 coming up and with it the switch to OSTree Native Container, I’ve been trying to learn what the changes will mean as a current user of Kinoite and rpm-ostree. I’ve read some information on bootc as well as the dnf cli wrapper to try to understand how things should work in the new container-based model using these new tools. However, there are still some things that are confusing and I am wondering if there will be any sort of documentation planned that’s tailored to existing rpm-ostree …

Questions about bootc and rpm-ostree

Hi Fedora Developers, Some questions about bootc and rpm-ostree: Will bootc completely replace rpm-ostree or will the work in conjunction? Is bootc built in such a way that it can work with version controlled systems like rpm-ostree as with A/B systems like systemd-sysupdate? In rpm-ostree you add a package to the system by layering. Will this replaced by a local containerfile in which you add the package to be installed? In the latter, the system has to be build locally. I guess this is not …

After reading the posts, it is still not clear to me what the advantages of bootc over rpm-ostree are and why to migrate to bootc since how the packages will be layered has not been decided yet?

One advantage of bootc is that bootc has better integration with containers so we can use standard container registries and tools to build the image. But the bootc uses more bandwidth than rpm-ostree as mentioned in the previous posts. And from my understanding (correct me if I am wrong), bootc will also use more storage if we have multiple deployments because deduplication in bootc is only layer-wise while deduplication in rpm-ostree is file-wise.