Re: Fedora minimal installations

Am 29.07.2015 23:26 schrieb "Adam Jackson" : > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 21:48 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > > Then I don't get the argument of the libs requiring device-mapper. > > /me is puzzled. > > The changelog message sort of implies the libs contain code that > doesn't work unless the rules h

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 21:48 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > Then I don't get the argument of the libs requiring device-mapper. > /me is puzzled. The changelog message sort of implies the libs contain code that doesn't work unless the rules have run. So the rules have to be installed, but they call

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:14:05PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > >> > - emacs-filesystem - do we really need that? > > >> That's a package with three directories... Guidelines require this > > >> dependency. > > > It's pretty painless in itself, but then requires anyone to build emacs > > > i

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:56:30 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 18:24 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > Some -filesystem packages contain shared libs. Others are not > .noarch: > > Not being noarch isn't a sin, mesa-filesystem owns %{_libdir}/dri so it > really can't be archfu

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 09:48:49PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > Am 29.07.2015 21:44 schrieb "Adam Jackson" : > > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 21:17 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > > > > > Well, then why not ship the udev rules with device-mapper instead of > > > the libs? > > > > I don't understand the

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:05:52 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> > - emacs-filesystem - do we really need that? > >> That's a package with three directories... Guidelines require this > >> dependency. > > > > It's pretty painless in itself, but then requires anyone to build emacs > > itself as

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:12:56 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Emacs for more detail." > >> > And once again the wording is weak. It says "should". Three times even. > >> What's wrong with the word "should"? What am I missing? Seems like the > >> usu

Re: Fedora minimal installations

Am 29.07.2015 21:44 schrieb "Adam Jackson" : > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 21:17 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > > > Well, then why not ship the udev rules with device-mapper instead of > > the libs? > > I don't understand the question. They _are_ shipped in device-mapper. > Then I don't get the argume

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 21:17 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > Well, then why not ship the udev rules with device-mapper instead of > the libs? I don't understand the question. They _are_ shipped in device-mapper. - ajax -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproj

Re: Fedora minimal installations

Am 29.07.2015 20:33 schrieb "Adam Jackson" : > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 15:42 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > > - krb5-libs requires gawk - why do libs require utils other than > > ldconfig? > > This looks like it was originally a Requires(triggerun) for the > configure_default_ccache_name case. Sinc

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

On 29 July 2015 at 20:08, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 08:03:00PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: >> >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages >> >> which >> >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into >> >> separ

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 08:03:00PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages > >> which > >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into > >> separate > >> sub-packages. This package should instead ship

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On 29 July 2015 at 17:24, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:09:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> > A couple of strange deps: >> > - libsemanage requires python >> > (filed as ) >> > - emacs-filesystem - do we r

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

On 29 July 2015 at 18:42, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:53:27 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages >> which >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into >> separate >> sub-packages.

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 14:40 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:33:22PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > > From staring at the reduced graph a bit, openldap -> nss-tools, which > > is the only thing pulling in the NSS stack. This looks pretty bogus to > > me, openldap is just the

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On 29 July 2015 at 17:29, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:24:17 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:09:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> > > A couple of strange deps: >> > > - libsemanage requires python >> > > (filed as

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 14:40 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:33:22PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > > From staring at the reduced graph a bit, openldap -> nss-tools, > > which > > is the only thing pulling in the NSS stack. This looks pretty > > bogus to > > me, openldap i

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:33:22PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > From staring at the reduced graph a bit, openldap -> nss-tools, which > is the only thing pulling in the NSS stack. This looks pretty bogus to > me, openldap is just the core library package and none of them seem to > have any exec ca

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 15:42 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > - krb5-libs requires gawk - why do libs require utils other than > ldconfig? This looks like it was originally a Requires(triggerun) for the configure_default_ccache_name case. Since that's handling upgrading from <= 1.11.3-16, we can prob

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 18:24 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Some -filesystem packages contain shared libs. Others are not > .noarch: Not being noarch isn't a sin, mesa-filesystem owns %{_libdir}/dri so it really can't be archful. Also, boost-filesystem and lua-filesystem appear to just be confu

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On 29.07.2015 16:09, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 03:42:28PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: >> In order to define the Base WG core package group and minimize minimal >> installations for e.g. cloud images and the atomic spin, I created some >> dependency lists: >> >> The

Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:53:27 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages which > also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into separate > sub-packages. This package should instead ship those files with the main > pac

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On 29.07.2015 18:29, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:24:17 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:09:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: A couple of strange deps: - libsemanage requires python (filed as

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:24:17 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:09:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > A couple of strange deps: > > > - libsemanage requires python > > > (filed as ) > > > - emacs-filesy

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:09:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > A couple of strange deps: > > - libsemanage requires python > > (filed as ) > > - emacs-filesystem - do we really need that? > That's a package with three director

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 14:09:02 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > A couple of strange deps: > > - emacs-filesystem - do we really need that? > That's a package with three directories... Guidelines require this dependency. That's https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Emacs#Case_II_3

Re: Fedora minimal installations

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 03:42:28PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > In order to define the Base WG core package group and minimize minimal > installations for e.g. cloud images and the atomic spin, I created some > dependency lists: > > There are so many definitions of minimum sets: > > systemd: cont

Fedora minimal installations

In order to define the Base WG core package group and minimize minimal installations for e.g. cloud images and the atomic spin, I created some dependency lists: There are so many definitions of minimum sets: systemd: container boot systemd + bash + login: container boot with login systemd + kerne