Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 20:20 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Di, 09.04.19 10:11, Adam Williamson (adamw...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > > Basically, anything that's part of the install environment is going to > > be present after a live install. That accounts for both of the above: > > the

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Japheth Cleaver
On 4/9/2019 11:14 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Di, 09.04.19 12:54, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote: This is more about socializing and teaching the systemd replacements... because most of the systemd advocates and heavy users I have asked aren't sure about how systemd

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 09.04.19 19:24, Richard Hughes (hughsi...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 19:21, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > Very similar is actually "fwupd", why does that need to run all the > > time? Seems like something that should be bus activatable, and > > exit-on-idle, but why run it

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 09.04.19 14:16, Cole Robinson (crobi...@redhat.com) wrote: > On 4/9/19 1:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 06:07:09PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >> multipathd [...] And beyond that, this daemon is really ugly too: it logs > >>at high log

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Richard Hughes
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 19:21, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Very similar is actually "fwupd", why does that need to run all the > time? Seems like something that should be bus activatable, and > exit-on-idle, but why run it all the time? It does exit on idle, if you don't have hardware that is

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 1:11 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 12:54 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 12:07, Lennart Poettering > > wrote: > > > > > Heya, > > > > > > today I installed the current Fedora 30 Workstation beta on my new > > > laptop. It

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 09.04.19 10:11, Adam Williamson (adamw...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > Basically, anything that's part of the install environment is going to > be present after a live install. That accounts for both of the above: > the installer supports multipath and dmraid storage devices, so the >

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Cole Robinson
On 4/9/19 1:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 06:07:09PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> multipathd [...] And beyond that, this daemon is really ugly too: it logs >>at high log levels during boot that it found no configuration and >>hence nothing to

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 09.04.19 12:54, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote: > I think these two are here because of the blivet you mentioned earlier. > Advanced partitioning requires them to be there... and there do seem to be > people who actually do expect both of those to work on their workstations

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 09.04.19 17:09, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 06:07:09PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > multipathd [...] And beyond that, this daemon is really ugly too: it logs > >at high log levels during boot that it found no configuration

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 10:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > To be specific here, 'at' is part of the @standard group. 'chrony' is > pulled in several ways. It's part of @standard *if gnome-control-center > is being installed*, so effectively it'll be installed with Workstation > but not other

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 12:54 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 12:07, Lennart Poettering > wrote: > > > Heya, > > > > today I installed the current Fedora 30 Workstation beta on my new > > laptop. It was a bumpy ride, I must say (the partitioner (blivet?) > > crashed

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 06:07:09PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > multipathd [...] And beyond that, this daemon is really ugly too: it logs >at high log levels during boot that it found no configuration and >hence nothing to do. Yes, obviously, but that's a reason to shut up >and

Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?

2019-04-09 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 12:07, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Heya, > > today I installed the current Fedora 30 Workstation beta on my new > laptop. It was a bumpy ride, I must say (the partitioner (blivet?) > crashed five times or so on me, always kicking me out of anaconda > again, just because I

<    1   2