Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 18:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 09:56 -0400, James Antill wrote: On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 10:42 +0300, Marius A wrote: Wow, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! On Fedora 21, any way to apply these before installing to SDD from live usb image? e.g. open terminal, run fs filter's, then start the install? So the way yum fs filter works is to change the yum configuration for tsflags and override_install_langs. If you specify --installroot when running the filter command then yum should write the new yum.conf within the installroot. Then when you run the next installroot command, to actually install, it will pickup those configurations and dtrt. You can also use --setopt to set them too, or .conf.blah if you are using the API. (adamw-catching-up-on-devel-thread-necro-alert!) Cast of raise the dead succeeded! Badge unlocked but that would not be any use to a live install, because a live install doesn't actually do any package transactions, would it? There aren't any rpmdb transactions to do the copy ... but AIUI you can still do them, right? There are also two parts to the filtering in yum: yum fs filter documentation ...this tells yum to start filtering all the documentation from all future transactions, but because of the way that this applies to removes as well as installs in rpm[1] yum also has: yum fs refilter yum fs refilter-cleanup ...the former alters all the yumdb.ts_install_langs and yumdb.tsflag_nodocs flags for the installed packages (without having to do an action reinstall), so that those packages are marked as having their docs/langs filtered (by yumdb, rpm -V will still complain). The later then deletes all the files that are on disk but should be filtered. [1] So if you do an upgrade the documentation for the new package is filtered from being installed, but the documentation from the old package is also filtered from being removed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 14:52 -0400, James Antill wrote: yum fs refilter ...the former alters all the yumdb.ts_install_langs and yumdb.tsflag_nodocs flags for the installed packages (without having to do an actual reinstall), so that those packages are marked as having their docs/langs filtered (by yumdb, rpm -V will still complain). I apparently changed/fixed this at some point from when I remembered, so it does do the reinstall transaction (and thus. rpm -V is happy). But I believe this is fine on the live CD, right? (you can run transactions to install/reinstall packages)? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 09:56 -0400, James Antill wrote: On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 10:42 +0300, Marius A wrote: Wow, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! On Fedora 21, any way to apply these before installing to SDD from live usb image? e.g. open terminal, run fs filter's, then start the install? So the way yum fs filter works is to change the yum configuration for tsflags and override_install_langs. If you specify --installroot when running the filter command then yum should write the new yum.conf within the installroot. Then when you run the next installroot command, to actually install, it will pickup those configurations and dtrt. You can also use --setopt to set them too, or .conf.blah if you are using the API. (adamw-catching-up-on-devel-thread-necro-alert!) but that would not be any use to a live install, because a live install doesn't actually do any package transactions, would it? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 11/04/14 21:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:13:42PM +0100, Andrew Price wrote: On 10/04/14 17:05, Bill Nottingham wrote: James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said: Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad. To put it in perspective, if we split out 'langpacks' for apps per language, something like gedit then grows *100* new subpackages. Bill It's a shame we can't store .mo files compressed. Unfortunately .mo files are mmapped and shared between processes, so compressing them wouldn't work :-( That's what I thought :/ Just thinking out loud, but maybe with an updated gettext(3) it could work, but I guess it would require some hefty changes in libc, right? Unless programs could be linked against a zintl lib to provide an alternative gettext(3) perhaps. Either way it would need to be transparently backward compatible with the current .mo format and obviously there'd be performance concerns for some programs so they'd need to stick with the current implementation. Portability shouldn't be an issue though as .po files can be compiled to whatever .mo format the distro/package uses. I think there's potential for innovation in that area anyway, but it would need some momentum behind it. Andy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/10/2014 09:53 PM, James Antill wrote: 20 | 38,561 | 38 G | 19M So there are 20MB of meta data that need to be downloaded once. This can hardly be a problem - even if the size tripled. same thing for updates gives: 18 | 18,606 | 20 G | 12M Ok, let this be another 20MB for the updates during the life time of an Fedora release. This would also not be an issue if we had not to download this file over and over again and then inflate it to ten times it's size. The main issue here is not the amount of data but the way yum handles it and the refusal of yum upstream to even consider an efficient meta data handling by insisting on the reconstruction of transport representation on the client side. In the end we need a saner MD handling no matter if we go for finer grained packages or not. I hope DNF will be able to provide this at some point when they are done with the more basic things. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:13:42PM +0100, Andrew Price wrote: On 10/04/14 17:05, Bill Nottingham wrote: James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said: Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad. To put it in perspective, if we split out 'langpacks' for apps per language, something like gedit then grows *100* new subpackages. Bill It's a shame we can't store .mo files compressed. Unfortunately .mo files are mmapped and shared between processes, so compressing them wouldn't work :-( Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:57 PM, James Antill ja...@fedoraproject.orgwrote: On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 12:37 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Marius A marius1...@gmail.com wrote: 1. remove /usr/share/docs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_excludedocs 1 For recent yum it's significantly better to do: yum fs filter nodocs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_install_langs en Dito. to get rid of extra languages by: yum fs filter langs en ...then you can yum fs refilter / yum fs refilter-cleanup. Wow, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! On Fedora 21, any way to apply these before installing to SDD from live usb image? e.g. open terminal, run fs filter's, then start the install? This thread has spawned good discussions tough :) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
rotated /var/log/journal (was Re: trimming down Fedora installed size)
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com wrote: On 04/09/2014 09:33 AM, Marius A wrote: 3. cleanup /var/log/journal, which seems it's not automatically rotated It's supposed to be automatic. How big did it become on your system? 600mb. Now in April I still had files from January. Looks about right according to man page: The first pair defaults to 10% and the second to 15% of the size of the respective file system. If the default size limits do not suit you, you can change them in /etc/systemd/journald.conf. Got it, I'll use that in the future. Thanks! Would be good to have a sample entry in man page with SystemMaxUse=, SystemKeepFree=, I cannot tell if it's bytes, mb, or percentage of file system size. Google answered that (e.g. 50M) Marius -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 09:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? From Debian world: https://wiki.debian.org/ReduceDebian -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 16:41 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 03:57:27PM -0400, James Antill wrote: For recent yum it's significantly better to do: yum fs filter nodocs Dito. to get rid of extra languages by: yum fs filter langs en ...then you can yum fs refilter / yum fs refilter-cleanup. So -- if the host is originally installed with anaconda's kickstart options for nodocs and language selection, will `yum fs refilter` still work? The way the nodocs stuff is done in anaconda is by changing the rpm macros directly where yum uses the slightly saner API there of setting the rpm.RPMTRANS_FLAG_NODOCS transaction flag. And yum looks just for that transaction flag when it sets/gets the yumdb tsflag_nodocs. On the other hand, the only way to change the installed languages is via. the rpm macro ... so while anaconda doesn't use the yum configuration to do it, I believe yum will still see that the rpm macro has changes and get/set yumdb ts_install_langs correctly. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 10:42 +0300, Marius A wrote: Wow, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! On Fedora 21, any way to apply these before installing to SDD from live usb image? e.g. open terminal, run fs filter's, then start the install? So the way yum fs filter works is to change the yum configuration for tsflags and override_install_langs. If you specify --installroot when running the filter command then yum should write the new yum.conf within the installroot. Then when you run the next installroot command, to actually install, it will pickup those configurations and dtrt. You can also use --setopt to set them too, or .conf.blah if you are using the API. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 23:10 +0200, Florian Festi wrote: On 04/09/2014 08:42 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Given the number of packages that ship localization, this seems like it would have a pretty dramatic effect on metadata size. Is this a concern? Meta data is a concern. But the major part of the meta data is file data and change logs. Everything else is less than 10%. So doubling or even tripling this part won't hurt. I'm not sure what you mean by 10% here, but tripling primary would hurt a lot. Eg. for Fedora 18/updates we have: 404K comps-f18.xml.gz 17M filelists.sqlite.bz2 6.2M other.sqlite.bz2 780K pkgtags.sqlite.gz 2.7M prestodelta.xml.gz 12M primary.sqlite.bz2 1.2M updateinfo.xml.gz ...and downloading ~15M does matter, so while compression helps and we are already in a lot of pain ... more pain is more pain. Also this locally turns into: 86M filelists_db.sqlite 34M other_db.sqlite 1.8M pkgtags.sqlite 13M prestodelta.xml 51M primary_db.sqlite 13M updateinfo.xml ...and randomly using 80+MB of extra disk space is also painful in some use cases. Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said: Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad. To put it in perspective, if we split out 'langpacks' for apps per language, something like gedit then grows *100* new subpackages. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 10/04/14 17:05, Bill Nottingham wrote:
James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would
triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad.
To put it in perspective, if we split out 'langpacks' for apps per language,
something like gedit then grows *100* new subpackages.
Bill
It's a shame we can't store .mo files compressed. The ratio seems quite
good:
[root@phanto ~]# cd /usr/share
[root@phanto share]# cp -r locale locale-compressed
[root@phanto share]# find locale-compressed -type f -name '*.mo' -exec
bzip2 --best {} \;
[root@phanto share]# du -sh locale locale-compressed
657Mlocale
245Mlocale-compressed
(NB this isn't a newly installed system.)
Andy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 9 April 2014 22:10, Florian Festi ffe...@redhat.com wrote: On 04/09/2014 08:42 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Given the number of packages that ship localization, this seems like it would have a pretty dramatic effect on metadata size. Is this a concern? Meta data is a concern. But the major part of the meta data is file data and change logs. Everything else is less than 10%. So doubling or even tripling this part won't hurt. What about performance? I don't have any figures, but my feeling was that TeX seemed to update awfully slowly after it was split into many small packages. -- Peter Oliver -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/10/2014 01:23 PM, Peter Oliver wrote: On 9 April 2014 22:10, Florian Festi ffe...@redhat.com wrote: On 04/09/2014 08:42 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Given the number of packages that ship localization, this seems like it would have a pretty dramatic effect on metadata size. Is this a concern? Meta data is a concern. But the major part of the meta data is file data and change logs. Everything else is less than 10%. So doubling or even tripling this part won't hurt. What about performance? I don't have any figures, but my feeling was that TeX seemed to update awfully slowly after it was split into many small packages. If package metadata is a problem, what if we split up the repositories and allocate some, that we can deem to be, to some degree, optional, to be for these less-than-mandatory packages. So, for example, if the extra languages packages are put into their own repository. This would, of course, be unfair to the languages that are not considered main, and this would likely heavily be biased towards English given it probably has the widest coverage. But what if manpages were in their own repository? I guess my point is, can we spread the problem out across semi-optional repositories and handle dependencies in a soft a way such that they'll be installed if they are present [i.e., the repository(-ies) with the given dependency(-ies) is/are present] but then the install continues without a problem except maybe a gentle notice that there exist optional dependencies so someone can choose to enable the associated repositories? I don't know if this will introduce more problems than it solves, but for the typical 1TB+ desktop user of Fedora, we can enable pretty-much all of these optional repositories, and for the embedded and/or minimal/micro installs, these optional repositories can be left unenabled. I think this would require fewer changes to the dependency logic and RPM itself than, say, a complicated set of flags and package labeling/tagging. P.S. Please forgive me if I use terms that might have specific meaning to the packaging team (maybe tagging means something I don't intend in that context, I'm using it generically). -- Libre Video http://librevideo.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 12:05 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said: Not that I assume splitting lanauges and docs. into sub packages would triple primary numbers, but if it did ... that would be bad. To put it in perspective, if we split out 'langpacks' for apps per language, something like gedit then grows *100* new subpackages. FWIW here is some data (For x86_64): Ver | pkgs. num. | pkgs. size | primary size 10 | 14,303 | 16 G | 8.2M 11 | 16,577 | 20 G | 11M 12 | 19,122 | 17 G | 12M 13 | 20,840 | 20 G | 13M 14 | 22,161 | 22 G | 14M 15 | 24,085 | 23 G | 14M 16 | 25,098 | 25 G | 15M 17 | 27,033 | 27 G | 15M 18 | 33,868 | 33 G | 18M 19 | 36,253 | 36 G | 18M 20 | 38,561 | 38 G | 19M ...which gives about 500-600 bytes of primary per. package. Doing the same thing for updates gives: Ver | pkgs. num. | pkgs. size | primary size 10 | 9,024 | 11 G | 6M 11 | 10,066 | 13 G | 6.6M 12 | 9,645 | 12 G | 6.4M 13 | 9,655 | 12 G | 6.5M 14 | 9,982 | 13 G | 6.8M 15 | 10,214 | 13 G | 7.1M 16 | 11,055 | 15 G | 7.6M 17 | 13,163 | 18 G | 8.4M 18 | 18,606 | 20 G | 12M ...which is a bit more at about 650 bytes per. package, probably due to compression not working as well with small numbers of packages. So to do some math with F20: in @^minimal-environment gives me 218 packages, so adding an extra docs package to just those is ~120k in release primary MD in @^web-server-environment (which requires filelists to resolve, nice) is 524 packages so you are at ~300k in @^gnome-desktop-environment is 1,265 packages and you are at ~750k. ...if you added 100x the packages to even the first though, it would obviously be pretty bad. Stats. generating using: repo=fedora for num in $(seq 10 20); do yum --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=$repo repoinfo $repo --releasever=$num | \ egrep -- '-(name|pkg|size)' ( cd /var/cache/yum/x86_64/$num/$repo; ls --size -h *primary* ) done -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 12:57 PM, James Antill wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 12:37 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Marius A marius1...@gmail.com wrote: 1. remove /usr/share/docs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_excludedocs 1 For recent yum it's significantly better to do: yum fs filter nodocs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_install_langs en Dito. to get rid of extra languages by: yum fs filter langs en ...then you can yum fs refilter / yum fs refilter-cleanup. It's possible that these settings break some things such as scriptlets that do not take missing files into account, but at least they're cleaner attempts than simply deleting installed files/dirs. This can still be true though. Of course, this would all be much more obvious if the `yum help` output didn't say fs Creates filesystem snapshots, or lists/deletes current snapshots, exactly what it also says for fssnapshot. Bug filed. [1] [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1086461 -- J. Randall Owens | http://www.ghiapet.net/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
trimming down Fedora installed size
Hi there, I've been struggling keeping a fedora 20 install on a small SSD, with 6gb / partition (/home is separate). Besides removing packages, I also found this useful: 1. remove /usr/share/docs 2. remove /usr/share/locale/* (all except en and en_US) 3. cleanup /var/log/journal, which seems it's not automatically rotated While this saves space, it also results in package upgrade warnings due to missing files. Are there any other disk space saving tips? What do you think about excluding docs by default in Fedora packages? And for docs either go online, or have a command to install/sync docs for all installed packages? (similar to ruby or npm packages install, not using rpm packages) I think less than 0.1% of users ever look into /usr/share/doc, but I don't have any data to back this up. As more folks switch to SSDs, it would benefit both for disk space saving and wearing to have less space occupied by default. Thanks -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Marius A marius1...@gmail.com wrote:
1. remove /usr/share/docs
Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever:
%_excludedocs 1
But that'll exclude _all_ files marked as docs in packages such as man
pages, it's not limited to /usr/share/doc. You might also/instead want
to try this:
%_netsharedpath %{_datadir}/doc
2. remove /usr/share/locale/* (all except en and en_US)
Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever:
%_install_langs en
It's possible that these settings break some things such as scriptlets
that do not take missing files into account, but at least they're
cleaner attempts than simply deleting installed files/dirs.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 09:33 AM, Marius A wrote: 3. cleanup /var/log/journal, which seems it's not automatically rotated It's supposed to be automatic. How big did it become on your system? If the default size limits do not suit you, you can change them in /etc/systemd/journald.conf. Michal -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2014 07:23 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlNFNA0ACgkQeiVVYja6o6P3SgCfRoJnKbSe/2g6/HIZkzkYAJRc iDcAoKRygNTlNDEIbf8j46e94RowXtis =OpG3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 11:50 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2014 07:23 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. Yeah and we probably have to move the man packages in their own sub-package once the rpm trigger that replaces the cron job lands JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:50:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. +1 to all of this. Needs: * rpm macros, possibly other RPM work * packaging guidelines * yum/dnf tooling * a plan for realistically getting from where we are now to where we want to be * executing on that plan Cloud SIG has a lot of interest in this and we may be able to find some contributors to the effort there. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Use_license_macro_in_RPMs_for_packages_in_Cloud_Image could be a model (and is in fact a prerequisite). -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org Tepid change for the somewhat better! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 01:50 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:23 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. Yes, this is one of the reasons we go for more expressive relations in RPM. You already very closely describe what I have in mind. There are basically two possible ways of making the distribution more flexible in the future: 1) Normal weak dependencies. In a normal install all the docs (and all other bells and whistles) get installed by default. You can remove/deselect packages which are pulled in by weak dependencies. You can even switch off all weak dependencies to only get the core packages. 2) Rich dependencies. Doc and language packages can be build as bridging packages that are only installed if two other packages are present. This can be done by adding e.g. Recommends: foo-langpack-hu if langsupport-hu to package foo or Supplements: foo and langsupport-hu to the foo-langpack-hu package. Similar things can be done for docs or any other set of packages that should be controlled by a single switch package. The nice thing about this is that no additional tooling is needed. Installing foo will automatically install the lang packs for all installed languages and installing a new langsupport package will install the langpacks for all installed packages. The plan is to get all pieces for 1) into F21. So it could already be used for F22. I will try to get 2) ready in this time frame, too, but the bets are still open. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:33:25AM +0300, Marius A wrote: I've been struggling keeping a fedora 20 install on a small SSD, with 6gb / partition (/home is separate). This part of conversation probably belongs on the user list rather than devel. But there are some development-related aspects (see rest of thread) and while we're at it, I have some constructive practical points as well. 2. remove /usr/share/locale/* (all except en and en_US) Also do localedef --delete-from-archive $(localedef --list-archive | grep -v -i ^$LANG | xargs) mv /usr/lib/locale/locale-archive /usr/lib/locale/locale-archive.tmpl build-locale-archive 3. cleanup /var/log/journal, which seems it's not automatically rotated It actually _is_ automatically rotated. See /etc/systemd/journald.conf and `man journald.conf`. Particularly, look at SystemMaxUse, SystemKeepFree, and MaxRetentionSec. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org Tepid change for the somewhat better! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 03:33 AM, Marius A wrote: I think less than 0.1% of users ever look into /usr/share/doc, but I don't have any data to back this up. I think I must fit into this 0.1% (and I am not disputing that that is the correct ratio, either) because I definitely use /usr/share/doc, but mostly because that holds more than just documentation. For example, avahi stores example service definitions for ssh and sftp under /usr/share/doc, and I believe this behavior exists with other packages for non-strictly-documentation data. I don't know what the standard is for defining what, if anything, should be placed under /usr/share/doc, but as it stands now, we should at least know and acknowledge that it's not just READMEs and HTML files when we make the decision to not install it by default or to reduce the chance that it's installed. Having said that, I am all for saving space on a default install and/or making a more minimal install possible. I noticed just now that manpages are compressed, but with gz. I am sure this discussion has already happened, but maybe we can have an alternative man-xz format that will reduce the size of the individual packages for a Fedora Minimal or somesuch (I think manpages should be very, very far down on the list of what to be left out from an install, as they are sometimes the last resort on what to do). My two bits on the idea. -- Libre Video http://librevideo.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:53:10AM -0400, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote: I think I must fit into this 0.1% (and I am not disputing that that is the correct ratio, either) because I definitely use /usr/share/doc, but mostly because that holds more than just documentation. For example, avahi stores example service definitions for ssh and sftp under /usr/share/doc, and I believe this behavior exists with other packages for non-strictly-documentation data. This is a packaging bug and should (probably must) be fixed. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org Tepid change for the somewhat better! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2014 10:01 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:53:10AM -0400, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote: I think I must fit into this 0.1% (and I am not disputing that that is the correct ratio, either) because I definitely use /usr/share/doc, but mostly because that holds more than just documentation. For example, avahi stores example service definitions for ssh and sftp under /usr/share/doc, and I believe this behavior exists with other packages for non-strictly-documentation data. This is a packaging bug and should (probably must) be fixed. Why is this a packaging bug? %doc is allowed to contain anything that is not used by the package for runtime execution. It's very common (and appropriate!) to have things like example config files in %doc. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlNFVN0ACgkQeiVVYja6o6OBywCgrYgmx8fjMrhIRLHLwPc8g9jv NGQAoKudkM+C7x56tY8bwjXE3ziCUKOT =b7Cg -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:10:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I think I must fit into this 0.1% (and I am not disputing that that is the correct ratio, either) because I definitely use /usr/share/doc, but mostly because that holds more than just documentation. For example, avahi stores example service definitions for ssh and sftp under /usr/share/doc, and I believe this behavior exists with other packages for non-strictly-documentation data. This is a packaging bug and should (probably must) be fixed. Why is this a packaging bug? %doc is allowed to contain anything that is not used by the package for runtime execution. It's very common (and appropriate!) to have things like example config files in %doc. Sorry, I missed the word example. Examples _are_ just documentation, pretty much by definition, and shouldn't be required at runtime. So I'm not seeing a problem here. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org Tepid change for the somewhat better! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 04:01 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:53:10AM -0400, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote: I think I must fit into this 0.1% (and I am not disputing that that is the correct ratio, either) because I definitely use /usr/share/doc, but mostly because that holds more than just documentation. For example, avahi stores example service definitions for ssh and sftp under /usr/share/doc, and I believe this behavior exists with other packages for non-strictly-documentation data. This is a packaging bug and should (probably must) be fixed. Pardon, but you're not right: Examples are considered to be documentation. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 03:53 PM, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote: Having said that, I am all for saving space on a default install and/or making a more minimal install possible. I noticed just now that manpages are compressed, but with gz. I am sure this discussion has already happened, but maybe we can have an alternative man-xz format that will reduce the size of the individual packages for a Fedora Minimal or somesuch (I think manpages should be very, very far down on the list of what to be left out from an install, as they are sometimes the last resort on what to do). SUSE once ( 10 years ago) had used *.bz2-compressed manpages, but for a while they also have returned to *.gz. I don't know why they did so, but I'd guess it simply doesn't pay-off size-wise and introduced too much of a penalty speed-wise. So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-pages, because their sizes are comparatively small on today's disk-scales, e.g. on my primary system: # du -sh /usr/share/man 89M /usr/share/man That's almost neglibile in comparision to the overall size of the installation. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 08:39 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:50:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. +1 to all of this. Needs: * rpm macros, possibly other RPM work * packaging guidelines * yum/dnf tooling * a plan for realistically getting from where we are now to where we want to be * executing on that plan From the desktop/workstation perspective, here are a few things I would like to see if we decide to work on this: Support for a new locale is more or less like a 'system extension' for the OS. It would be good to define clear rules for what it means to provide a subpackage that becomes part of this system extension. In an ideal world, this could even be automatic and pattern-based (e.g. if you install anything into /usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0, you are providing a 'codec' extension, and all the files below that directory belong to it). To present this in the UI, we need to know the available 'extension points' (either a fixed list, or a way to enumerate them), as well as the installed and available extensions for each, including suitable metadata (name+short description at least). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 02:31 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Whether they should or should not be installed by default depends on people personal preferences and SIG's uses cases/target audience Embedded + cloud + containers probably want to remove them Server + desktop probably wants to keep them And to you 89m is little, to me it's much so fourth and so on... JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-pages, because their sizes are comparatively small on today's disk-scales, e.g. on my primary system: # du -sh /usr/share/man 89M /usr/share/man That's almost neglibile in comparision to the overall size of the installation. Disk usage of many small files can be disproportionate. On some platforms -- embedded, lightweight VMs, the savings are sometimes important. They sure were on XO-1 not that long ago, and I'm not sure what I'd do with docs and manages in an on-demand VMs. Having said that, exclude_docs and install_langs have worked well for OLPC and work reasonably well for lightweight VMs too. I am not arguing for big changes here. The plans outlined seem doable, but reworking the whole distro into doc packages to fix something that already works /reasonably well/ seems... not cost effective. There are some limited use cases that aren't ideal now with install_lang and exclude_docs. For example, installing missing docs or langs -- for all or some packages. But that seems like it could be solved by a script that drives rpm to do just that. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first ~ http://docs.moodle.org/en/User:Martin_Langhoff -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
may be easier to just rewrite the mandb for it rather than create extra confusion of two man pages Corey W Sheldon Owner, 1st Class Mobile Shine 310.909.7672 www.facebook.com/1stclassmobileshine On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/09/2014 02:31 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Whether they should or should not be installed by default depends on people personal preferences and SIG's uses cases/target audience Embedded + cloud + containers probably want to remove them Server + desktop probably wants to keep them And to you 89m is little, to me it's much so fourth and so on... JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote: It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. See my other email on this thread. Following on what I wrote there, instead of reworking all the packages across the distro, a script can be written to achieve the equivalent of exclude_docs. Embedded + cloud + containers probably want to remove them Those already work right with exclude_docs -- I have been a primary user of both use cases (OLPC as embedded, cloud/containers now). cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first ~ http://docs.moodle.org/en/User:Martin_Langhoff -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:49:56PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Since man pages are marked as %doc, you can use %_excludedocs macro: $ grep -B2 excludedoc /usr/lib/rpm/macros # Boolean (i.e. 1 == yes, 0 == no) that controls whether files # marked as %doc should be installed. #%_excludedocs And also: $ grep -B3 install_langs /usr/lib/rpm/macros # A colon separated list of desired locales to be installed; # all means install all locale specific files. # %_install_langs all -- Regards,-- Sir Raorn. --- https://plus.google.com/+AlexeyFroloff pgpSHNhRvZ_wA.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 02:59 PM, Alexey I. Froloff wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:49:56PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Since man pages are marked as %doc, you can use %_excludedocs macro: $ grep -B2 excludedoc /usr/lib/rpm/macros # Boolean (i.e. 1 == yes, 0 == no) that controls whether files # marked as %doc should be installed. #%_excludedocs And also: $ grep -B3 install_langs /usr/lib/rpm/macros # A colon separated list of desired locales to be installed; # all means install all locale specific files. # %_install_langs all Does not solve the problem of dependency like for example if we want to get rid of man-db and it's dependency's so forth and so on. The only way we can move forward is *fixing* our dependency tree. It is a mess to say the least JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 04:53 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote: From the desktop/workstation perspective, here are a few things I would like to see if we decide to work on this: Support for a new locale is more or less like a 'system extension' for the OS. It would be good to define clear rules for what it means to provide a subpackage that becomes part of this system extension. Yes, but my guess this is not very complicated. Natural languages are pretty straight forward. All other 'system extension' will basically come with their own description. We just have to make sure that the description as shown to the user is not completely ignored by the packages using it. In an ideal world, this could even be automatic and pattern-based (e.g. if you install anything into /usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0, you are providing a 'codec' extension, and all the files below that directory belong to it). *cough* *cough* To present this in the UI, we need to know the available 'extension points' (either a fixed list, or a way to enumerate them), as well as the installed and available extensions for each, including suitable metadata (name+short description at least). We need the rethink the whole packaging UI anyway. Comps still has all its known problems. SoftwareCenter has its own, very special view on the packages, and no one has a clue how to make use of the weak weak dependencies (which are not completely unlike optional packages in comps). So making the number of installed and available packages more manageable is one of the next big things that need to be done after the basic infrastructure is in place. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 03:00:24PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Does not solve the problem of dependency like for example if we want to get rid of man-db and it's dependency's so forth and so on. Well, it does solve the wasted disk space problem. The only way we can move forward is *fixing* our dependency tree. It is a mess to say the least I second that... -- Regards,-- Sir Raorn. --- https://plus.google.com/+AlexeyFroloff pgp9aIjMXWF1r.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2014 08:42 AM, Florian Festi wrote: On 04/09/2014 01:50 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:23 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak dependencies? Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the presence of that metapackage on the system. Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special tooling or a yum plugin. Yes, this is one of the reasons we go for more expressive relations in RPM. You already very closely describe what I have in mind. There are basically two possible ways of making the distribution more flexible in the future: 1) Normal weak dependencies. In a normal install all the docs (and all other bells and whistles) get installed by default. You can remove/deselect packages which are pulled in by weak dependencies. You can even switch off all weak dependencies to only get the core packages. 2) Rich dependencies. Doc and language packages can be build as bridging packages that are only installed if two other packages are present. This can be done by adding e.g. Recommends: foo-langpack-hu if langsupport-hu to package foo or Supplements: foo and langsupport-hu This construct would be extremely valuable to the SSSD as well: %package -n client Recommends: sssd-client.i686 if glibc.i686 to the foo-langpack-hu package. Similar things can be done for docs or any other set of packages that should be controlled by a single switch package. The nice thing about this is that no additional tooling is needed. Installing foo will automatically install the lang packs for all installed languages and installing a new langsupport package will install the langpacks for all installed packages. The second half of this statement is the exciting part to me. It's pretty easy to install a language at package-install time, but in order to add the language subpackages for all installed packages on the system if the new langsupport package comes in will mean re-processing all of the dependencies on the installed packages. Probably very slow, but certainly valuable. The plan is to get all pieces for 1) into F21. So it could already be used for F22. I will try to get 2) ready in this time frame, too, but the bets are still open. This would be fantastic, now we just need the FPC to agree. Might be worth filing an FPC bug or two now for them to debate before pushing too hard here. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlNFZeQACgkQeiVVYja6o6Nv7ACgom5qypruoq68WLtnFqLydelm ykkAn21vSW53VnMypMNz+amO9AaTfKrl =CKpf -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 05:23 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: This construct would be extremely valuable to the SSSD as well: %package -n client Recommends: sssd-client.i686 if glibc.i686 That's not exactly by accident... It's pretty easy to install a language at package-install time, but in order to add the language subpackages for all installed packages on the system if the new langsupport package comes in will mean re-processing all of the dependencies on the installed packages. Probably very slow, but certainly valuable. Well, there is a reason why Fedora is moving to a new dependency solver. I am pretty optimistic about performance. The plan is to get all pieces for 1) into F21. So it could already be used for F22. I will try to get 2) ready in this time frame, too, but the bets are still open. This would be fantastic, now we just need the FPC to agree. Might be worth filing an FPC bug or two now for them to debate before pushing too hard here. For now there is just https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.12 I will talk to the FPC as soon as the parts are all in place. Be aware that it is not enough to just implement the stuff. It needs to be tested and to make its way to the builders. Even with a hurry things need quite some time in RPM land. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 04:49 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 02:31 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Well, rpm-wise, all files marked %doc are considered to be optional. I.e. rm -rf /usr/share/doc/* etc. are supposed to work = rpm issuing warnings/errors after %doc-files removals should be considered to be packaging bugs (I don't have a case at hand, but know there are such bugs). Whether they should or should not be installed by default depends on people personal preferences and SIG's uses cases/target audience Embedded + cloud + containers probably want to remove them Server + desktop probably wants to keep them And to you 89m is little, to me it's much so fourth and so on... C'mon, we have packages whose install-sizes are measured in 10ths and 100s of MBs ... and we have other dirs which can easily grow beyond any limits. Same system as before: # du -sh /var/cache /usr 13G /var/cache 8.8G/usr Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 04:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: C'mon, we have packages whose install-sizes are measured in 10ths and 100s of MBs ... and we have other dirs which can easily grow beyond any limits. I was refering to it being in the eye of the beholder so to speak but as I see it we need to start working towards shrinking the core/base of the distribution to the size of posted stamp compare to the bloat we are now, to keep us agile enough and relevant for the next generation of tinkerers embedded as well as to be able to serve the cloud and container market. In doing so we need to fix dependency and drop or make it optional to add or remove various components ( agile ) as well as the legacy cruff which everybody hold so dear to, in the process. copr presents us with the ability to mapping out and make such drastic changes without having to cause disruption to Fedora in general and people work flows until things have been properly fixed and prepared to do so. Something we did not have when we decide to replace the distribution init system. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
Florian Festi (ffe...@redhat.com) said: 1) Normal weak dependencies. In a normal install all the docs (and all other bells and whistles) get installed by default. You can remove/deselect packages which are pulled in by weak dependencies. You can even switch off all weak dependencies to only get the core packages. 2) Rich dependencies. Doc and language packages can be build as bridging packages that are only installed if two other packages are present. This can be done by adding e.g. Recommends: foo-langpack-hu if langsupport-hu to package foo or Supplements: foo and langsupport-hu to the foo-langpack-hu package. Similar things can be done for docs or any other set of packages that should be controlled by a single switch package. Given the number of packages that ship localization, this seems like it would have a pretty dramatic effect on metadata size. Is this a concern? Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 12:37 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Marius A marius1...@gmail.com wrote: 1. remove /usr/share/docs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_excludedocs 1 For recent yum it's significantly better to do: yum fs filter nodocs Try this in /etc/rpm/macros.whatever: %_install_langs en Dito. to get rid of extra languages by: yum fs filter langs en ...then you can yum fs refilter / yum fs refilter-cleanup. It's possible that these settings break some things such as scriptlets that do not take missing files into account, but at least they're cleaner attempts than simply deleting installed files/dirs. This can still be true though. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
I would like to see logic like this:
manpage files don't get installed unless/until:
1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that
package would require the 'man' package.
OR
2) package is installed AND man is installed.
Don't wan't the manpages taking up disk space? remove the 'man' package
and all manpages disappear.
Don't use en_US and don't want to waste space on that either, remove the
'localization-en_US' package and its corresponding localizations of all
installed packages will dispapear too.
Localization could work the same way. Once a package' localization cruft
is large enough to merit the work, the packager would split it out into
${packagename}-en_US packages for each localization. Distro would maintain
an essentially empty package called localization-en_US, etc for each
localization. Then when you install a localized package, you get
${packagename}-en_US localization-en_us installed, and if you have more
than one localization package installed, you get the corresponding
localized subpackages of ${package}.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Marius A marius1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there,
I've been struggling keeping a fedora 20 install on a small SSD, with
6gb / partition (/home is separate).
Besides removing packages, I also found this useful:
1. remove /usr/share/docs
2. remove /usr/share/locale/* (all except en and en_US)
3. cleanup /var/log/journal, which seems it's not automatically rotated
While this saves space, it also results in package upgrade warnings due to
missing files.
Are there any other disk space saving tips?
What do you think about excluding docs by default in Fedora packages?
And for docs either go online, or have a command to install/sync docs for
all installed packages? (similar to ruby or npm packages install, not using
rpm packages)
I think less than 0.1% of users ever look into /usr/share/doc, but I don't
have any data to back this up.
As more folks switch to SSDs, it would benefit both for disk space saving
and wearing to have less space occupied by default.
Thanks
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 03:57:27PM -0400, James Antill wrote: For recent yum it's significantly better to do: yum fs filter nodocs Dito. to get rid of extra languages by: yum fs filter langs en ...then you can yum fs refilter / yum fs refilter-cleanup. So -- if the host is originally installed with anaconda's kickstart options for nodocs and language selection, will `yum fs refilter` still work? -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--mat...@fedoraproject.org Tepid change for the somewhat better! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
Am 09.04.2014 22:05, schrieb Billy Crook: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. Don't wan't the manpages taking up disk space? remove the 'man' package and all manpages disappear. Don't use en_US and don't want to waste space on that either, remove the 'localization-en_US' package and its corresponding localizations of all installed packages will dispapear too packages i build at my own have package-manpages for any man/doc parts on all the servers i maintain they are not installed it's enough to have them on *one* central admin server signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 10:54 -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: There are some limited use cases that aren't ideal now with install_lang and exclude_docs. For example, installing missing docs or langs -- for all or some packages. But that seems like it could be solved by a script that drives rpm to do just that. While the recent yum fs refilter stuff tries to help here, the big problem is that the exclude-docs/exclude-langs options are transaction wide ... so you can't do an upgrade and have pkg X with docs and pkg Y without. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.netwrote: Am 09.04.2014 22:05, schrieb Billy Crook: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. Don't wan't the manpages taking up disk space? remove the 'man' package and all manpages disappear. Don't use en_US and don't want to waste space on that either, remove the 'localization-en_US' package and its corresponding localizations of all installed packages will dispapear too packages i build at my own have package-manpages for any man/doc parts on all the servers i maintain they are not installed it's enough to have them on *one* central admin server heck, on my desktop I might end up just yum installing *-manpages to save time later. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 08:42 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Given the number of packages that ship localization, this seems like it would have a pretty dramatic effect on metadata size. Is this a concern? Meta data is a concern. But the major part of the meta data is file data and change logs. Everything else is less than 10%. So doubling or even tripling this part won't hurt. The actual issue we have with meta data is that is is downloaded over and over again (for updates). Should we ever get this fixed the growth of meta data is no longer an issue. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 10:05 PM, Billy Crook wrote: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. In other words, you want to crippled end-user usability to NULL. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
Am 09.04.2014 23:01, schrieb Billy Crook: On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 09.04.2014 22:05, schrieb Billy Crook: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. Don't wan't the manpages taking up disk space? remove the 'man' package and all manpages disappear. Don't use en_US and don't want to waste space on that either, remove the 'localization-en_US' package and its corresponding localizations of all installed packages will dispapear too packages i build at my own have package-manpages for any man/doc parts on all the servers i maintain they are not installed it's enough to have them on *one* central admin server heck, on my desktop I might end up just yum installing *-manpages to save time later really? compared how often i reinstall a workstation (never) and how often i need a manpage because command --help don't answer the question that is unlikely how many manpages do you have installed and how many of them you ever viewed in the past let say 5 years? escpecially because the goal is to seperate things which does *not* mean they are not installed in most setups - a meta-package postfix can pull postfix-server and postfix-manuals while you can remove the metapackage and postfix-manuals signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 09:12 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 04/09/2014 10:05 PM, Billy Crook wrote: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. In other words, you want to crippled end-user usability to NULL. I would not be dwelling to much on the usability topic since we have bigger issues to fry then end-user usability with minimal installation footprint for cloud/containers/servers which can be easily solve with same concept as is behind command-not-found for man-pages as in man-page-not-found and move cloud/container/server administration into the realm of install on demand ( which arguably we should be moving more towards at on the 21 century rather then rely on plethora of installation commands and package names ) and ofcourse we would remove the silliness of having to confirm the installation since I as an administrators have already made the gesture that I need the command or the man page when I write foo or man foo so I should not have to confirm it to. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
Am 10.04.2014 00:00, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: On 04/09/2014 09:12 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 04/09/2014 10:05 PM, Billy Crook wrote: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2) package is installed AND man is installed. In other words, you want to crippled end-user usability to NULL. I would not be dwelling to much on the usability topic since we have bigger issues to fry then end-user usability with minimal installation footprint for cloud/containers/servers which can be easily solve with same concept as is behind command-not-found for man-pages as in man-page-not-found and move cloud/container/server administration into the realm of install on demand ( which arguably we should be moving more towards at on the 21 century rather then rely on plethora of installation commands and package names ) and ofcourse we would remove the silliness of having to confirm the installation since I as an administrators have already made the gesture that I need the command or the man page when I write foo or man foo so I should not have to confirm it to no - if i type man whatever and that starts to pull 10 MB packages i stop and think 5 seconds if there is one of my ,ore than 30 machines which have it already signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: trimming down Fedora installed size
On 04/09/2014 10:06 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: no - if i type man whatever and that starts to pull 10 MB packages i stop and think 5 seconds if there is one of my ,ore than 30 machines which have it already That is you If I was concern with that I would have done the thinking ahead of time and simply would not have installed the man-page-not-found package on those ten,hundred or thousand machines... JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
