Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-12-07 Thread Alek Paunov
Hi Chris, On 2015-09-22 04:26, Chris Murphy wrote: ... For the cloud image, extlinux actually works. The problem pops up with any image intended for baremetal whre UEFI Secure Boot support is needed, and right now GRUB2 does and extlinux doesn't, so any "atomic" image would need GRUB2.

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:09:50AM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > It's nice to be able to edit the .py for testing without going through > hoops or building/installing rpms. Right, but you know that if you're doing that in /usr/lib, that's *gross*, right? :) -- Matthew Miller

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Orion Poplawski
On 09/25/2015 08:36 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:09:50AM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: It's nice to be able to edit the .py for testing without going through hoops or building/installing rpms. Right, but you know that if you're doing that in /usr/lib, that's *gross*,

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Christopher Meng
On 9/25/15, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:30:38AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >> Maybe we could utilize weak dependencies here. The python-foo package >> would have only bytecompiled files and would Recommend >> python-foo-sourcefiles. That way

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:30:38AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Maybe we could utilize weak dependencies here. The python-foo package > would have only bytecompiled files and would Recommend > python-foo-sourcefiles. That way python-foo-sourcefiles would be > installed in standard setting, but

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Przemek Klosowski
On 09/25/2015 10:04 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just optionally, using recommends. On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't drop the .py files? I see a

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Bohuslav Kabrda
- Original Message - > On 09/25/2015 08:36 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:09:50AM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > >> It's nice to be able to edit the .py for testing without going through > >> hoops or building/installing rpms. > > > > Right, but you know that if

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Orion Poplawski
On 09/25/2015 10:01 AM, Christopher Meng wrote: > On 9/25/15, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:30:38AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >>> Maybe we could utilize weak dependencies here. The python-foo package >>> would have only bytecompiled files and

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Florian Weimer
* Matthew Miller: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just >> optionally, using recommends. >> >> On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't drop >> the .py files? I see a lot of

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 25.9.2015 v 16:04 Matthew Miller napsal(a): > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just >> optionally, using recommends. Just to be clear, not/optional shipping the bytecode is the preferred method IMO

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 25.9.2015 v 16:15 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a): > On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 10:04 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just >>> optionally, using recommends. >>> >>> On contrary, if

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Neal Gompa
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 25.9.2015 v 16:15 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a): > > (it is invaluable for learning and > > debugging purposes to be able to read/edit the code). > > Come on, this is not an argument. We don't install source code for any >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Matthew Miller
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:59:09AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > cares?" adds up. If it *got* us anything in terms of functionality, > > okay, I can sell that to people, but for the base, this is just bloat. > Bummer. The reason for libxkbcommon dependency is to be able to make >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Fabian Deutsch
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:59:09AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> > cares?" adds up. If it *got* us anything in terms of functionality, >> > okay, I can sell that to people, but for the base, this is

python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Matthew Miller
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just > optionally, using recommends. > > On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't drop > the .py files? I see a lot of duplication all around python

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Paul Wouters
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just optionally, using recommends. On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't drop the .py files? I see a

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Mathieu Bridon
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 10:04 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just > > optionally, using recommends. > > > > On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't >

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Fabian Deutsch
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't drop >> the .py files? I see a lot of duplication all around python packages Don't do that, it has impact on functionality. We did this for

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 16:17 +0200, Fabian Deutsch wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: > > > On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you > > > don't drop > > > the .py files? I see a lot of duplication all around python > > >

Re: python: dropping the .py files [was Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything)] bloat

2015-09-25 Thread Fabian Deutsch
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 16:17 +0200, Fabian Deutsch wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller >> wrote: >> > > On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you >>

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 22.9.2015 v 11:07 Matej Stuchlik napsal(a): > > When it comes to python3, one way to shave off ~9MiB from python3-libs, and > possibly quite a bit more overall, would be to not install both optimized and > unoptimized bytecode, as we do now, but just the unoptimized one (the > performance >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-24 Thread Adam Jackson
On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 00:59 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Bummer. The reason for libxkbcommon dependency is to be able to make > sure that the new config is valid. Before that was added we had a set > of rules and heuristics implemented in localed and regular bug reports > when

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-24 Thread Matthias Clasen
On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 11:00 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 00:59 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > Bummer. The reason for libxkbcommon dependency is to be able to > > make > > sure that the new config is valid. Before that was added we had a > > set > > of rules

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-24 Thread Harald Hoyer
Am 21.09.2015 um 11:07 schrieb Matthew Miller: > Fedora-Cloud-Base-20141203-21.x86_64.qcow2: 151M > Fedora-Cloud-Base-23_Beta-20150915.x86_64.qcow2: 275M > > In just one year — 82% more awesome? > > I'd really like this to stay below 200MB as a competitive threshold. > Or, if we're

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:35:04PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > >5423400 xkeyboard-config # really looks like a systemd dep chain > > > >involving plymouth > > > plymouth luckily is no hard dependency for anything > > "Involving plymouth" might have been wrong.

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:35:54AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 05:11:24PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > > >5423400 xkeyboard-config # really looks like a systemd dep chain > > >involving plymouth > > plymouth luckily is no hard dependency for anything > >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 02:46:52PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:35:04PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > >5423400 xkeyboard-config # really looks like a systemd dep chain > > > > >involving plymouth > > > > plymouth luckily is no hard dependency

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 07:07:09PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Not really. localed is simply linked to libxkbcommon.so, so it will > not run without. Anyway, libxkbcommon.rpm is 260kb, so some potential > (complicated) scheme to avoid a dependency simply does not seem worth > the

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Robert Kuska
- Original Message - > From: "Matthew Miller" <mat...@fedoraproject.org> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:49:19 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 clou

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-23 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 03:28:57PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 07:07:09PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Not really. localed is simply linked to libxkbcommon.so, so it will > > not run without. Anyway, libxkbcommon.rpm is 260kb, so some potential > >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matej Stuchlik
- Original Message - > From: "Matthew Miller" <mat...@fedoraproject.org> > To: "Fedora Development List" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:07:40 PM > Subject: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, mi

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread drago01
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > [...] > When it comes to python3, one way to shave off ~9MiB from python3-libs, and > possibly quite a bit more overall, would be to not install both optimized and > unoptimized bytecode, as we do now, but just the

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matthew Miller
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 07:26:52PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > For the cloud image, extlinux actually works. The problem pops up with > any image intended for baremetal whre UEFI Secure Boot support is > needed, and right now GRUB2 does and extlinux doesn't, so any "atomic" > image would need

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matthew Miller
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 05:07:58AM -0400, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > When it comes to python3, one way to shave off ~9MiB from > python3-libs, and possibly quite a bit more overall, would be to not > install both optimized and unoptimized bytecode, as we do now, but > just the unoptimized one (the

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 5:36 AM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: >> >> Also note that it's possibly not just 9MB. For instance python3-boto, also >> on this list, would >> save 4.7MB, python3-pip 2.9MB. In

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Neal Gompa
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:20:27 AM > > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal > anything) bloat > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Matej Stuchlik <mstuc...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > [...] > > >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matej Stuchlik
- Original Message - > From: "drago01" <drag...@gmail.com> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:20:27 AM > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and,

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "Ville Skyttä" >> >> Managed to fiddle around some more and looks like the above is a false >> concern, many *.pyc, *.opt-1.pyc and *.opt-2.pyc are identical.

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "Ville Skyttä" >> >> Also, be careful with measuring space savings when working with *.pyo. >> It is a common case that *.pyc and *.pyo are identical, and when

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
On Tuesday, 22 September 2015 at 03:26, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: [...] > > But *that* said, the current packaging means that grub2 adds 70MB on > > disk — about 12% of the entire cloud image. I'm not saying grub2 is >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matej Stuchlik
- Original Message - > From: "Ville Skyttä" <ville.sky...@iki.fi> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:36:09 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and,

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > BTW I just had a peek into some Arch Linux Python 3.5 packages, and it > seems they contain *no* identical *.pyc and corresponding *.opt-1.pyc > files. This is bad news wrt the hardlinking. I haven't found any >

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matej Stuchlik
- Original Message - > From: "Ville Skyttä" <ville.sky...@iki.fi> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:43:33 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and,

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-22 Thread Matej Stuchlik
- Original Message - > From: "Ville Skyttä" <ville.sky...@iki.fi> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:03:24 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and,

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Chris Murphy
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:39:46PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> It's worth pointing out that your griping about grub2 "growth" seems >> misleading. The sizes of the grub2 packages did not change between >> F22 and

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Matthew Miller
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 05:11:24PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > >5423400 xkeyboard-config # really looks like a systemd dep chain > >involving plymouth > plymouth luckily is no hard dependency for anything "Involving plymouth" might have been wrong. libxkbcommon.so.0 looks like a direct

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:07:40AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > Okay, let's look on disk: > > > [f21]$ sudo du -sh * 2>/dev/null|sort -h > [...] > 36K home > 40K root > 228Krun > 21M boot > 22M etc > 34M var > 276Musr I find that KDE filelight (also GNOME

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 21.09.2015 um 17:07 schrieb Matthew Miller: 5423400 xkeyboard-config # really looks like a systemd dep chain involving plymouth plymouth luckily is no hard dependency for anything [root@rawhide ~]# rpm -qa | grep keyboard xkeyboard-config-2.15-2.fc23.noarch [root@rawhide ~]# rpm -qa

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 21/09/15 16:07, Matthew Miller wrote: > Fedora-Cloud-Base-20141203-21.x86_64.qcow2: 151M > Fedora-Cloud-Base-23_Beta-20150915.x86_64.qcow2: 275M > > In just one year — 82% more awesome? > > I'd really like this to stay below 200MB as a competitive threshold. > Or, if we're going to

Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Matthew Miller
Fedora-Cloud-Base-20141203-21.x86_64.qcow2: 151M Fedora-Cloud-Base-23_Beta-20150915.x86_64.qcow2: 275M In just one year — 82% more awesome? I'd really like this to stay below 200MB as a competitive threshold. Or, if we're going to be bigger than that, be bigger for REASONS, not just

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Matthew Miller
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:39:46PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > It's worth pointing out that your griping about grub2 "growth" seems > misleading. The sizes of the grub2 packages did not change between > F22 and F23. What seems to have happened is that the cloud images > added the grub2 packages,

Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter, minimal anything) bloat

2015-09-21 Thread Josh Boyer
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > Fedora-Cloud-Base-20141203-21.x86_64.qcow2: 151M > Fedora-Cloud-Base-23_Beta-20150915.x86_64.qcow2: 275M > > In just one year — 82% more awesome? > > I'd really like this to stay below 200MB as a