Re: Can we maybe reduce the set of packages we install by default a bit?
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 proceed quickly, not to complain loudly about that so that it
even appears on the scren (I mean srsly, this is the first thing I
saw when i booted from the fedora live media: a log message printed
all over the screen that multipathd has no working
configuration...).
This was supposed to be fixed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1631772.
If not, please reopen that bug.
5. libvirtd. Why is this running? Can't we make this socket
activatable + exit-on-idel?
This was supposed to happen. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290357.
I guess I should file bz issues about all of the above, but I am not
sure against which packages? anaconda? comps (does that still exist)?
the individual packages?
Individual packages. Logging issue obviously belong in the packages.
In principle fedora-release gets to decide what is started by default,
but it's probably better to start with a bug on the package because
its the maintainers know best if not starting the service by default
is possible and can file a fedora-release PR.
It's also my hope that maybe some champion volunteers for
tracking
down issues like this and fixing them? i.e. keeping udev settle out of
the default install alone would be a worthy goal for every release,
given that it doubles boot time on typical systems... Anyone up for
that?
Zbyszek