2:57 p.m.
Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
work but it fails:
# dnf group install "Fedora Server"
Using metadata from Mon Feb 16 21:33:49 2015
Error: package firewalld-config-standard-0.3.13-2.fc22.noarch
conflicts with system-release-server provided by
fedora-release-server-22-0.12.noarch
The only suggestion I'm finding so far is using fedup --product=server
but that seems meant for doing a product convert in the course of an n
n+1 upgrade. The group install seems like it ought to work. Same
error happens using yum.
Funny enough, if I 'dnf remove firewalld-config-standard' the
resolution ends up being a (partial?) conversion to fedora-server by
removing firewalld-config-standard and fedora-release-nonproduct, and
then installing a pile of server things including cockpit and
fedora-release-server.
So the question really is, is conversion supposed to be possible, and
if so should it be possible with group install, and where are the bugs
to be filed, if any?
--
Chris Murphy
4:06 p.m.
search bugzilla ther are several bugs on this and a nice discussion. Can't find teh
link at the moment
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Murphy" <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases"
<test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:57:45 PM
Subject: Convert nonproduct to productX
Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
work but it fails:
# dnf group install "Fedora Server"
Using metadata from Mon Feb 16 21:33:49 2015
Error: package firewalld-config-standard-0.3.13-2.fc22.noarch
conflicts with system-release-server provided by
fedora-release-server-22-0.12.noarch
The only suggestion I'm finding so far is using fedup --product=server
but that seems meant for doing a product convert in the course of an n
n+1 upgrade. The group install seems like it ought to work. Same
error happens using yum.
Funny enough, if I 'dnf remove firewalld-config-standard' the
resolution ends up being a (partial?) conversion to fedora-server by
removing firewalld-config-standard and fedora-release-nonproduct, and
then installing a pile of server things including cockpit and
fedora-release-server.
So the question really is, is conversion supposed to be possible, and
if so should it be possible with group install, and where are the bugs
to be filed, if any?
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
7:34 p.m.
On Feb 17, 2015 1:57 PM, "Chris Murphy" <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
work but it fails:
# dnf group install "Fedora Server"
Using metadata from Mon Feb 16 21:33:49 2015
Error: package firewalld-config-standard-0.3.13-2.fc22.noarch
conflicts with system-release-server provided by
fedora-release-server-22-0.12.noarch
The only suggestion I'm finding so far is using fedup --product=server
but that seems meant for doing a product convert in the course of an n
> n+1 upgrade. The group install seems like it ought to work. Same
error happens using yum.
Funny enough, if I 'dnf remove firewalld-config-standard' the
resolution ends up being a (partial?) conversion to fedora-server by
removing firewalld-config-standard and fedora-release-nonproduct, and
then installing a pile of server things including cockpit and
fedora-release-server.
So the question really is, is conversion supposed to be possible, and
if so should it be possible with group install, and where are the bugs
to be filed, if any?
--
Chris Murphy
--
In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that should
be encouraged. There are a handful of methods you could use for
conversion; yum shell, yum swap, adding and removing packages,
adopt-your-cattle scripts, more; further permutations between start/end
products and methods.
It is a whole lot of complexity to test and support, for use cases like:
"I installed the XFCE spin but I really wanted Fedora Server" or
"I installed Fedora Server, but I want an LXDE desktop and don't care about
cockpit or rolekit"
or "I installed Fedora Workstation but I don't like GNOME and am not a
developer, I just want MATE and LibreOffice".
Conversion between products is a sign that 1) the user is not familiar with
the concept of Fedora products and spins, maybe because the former is new,
or 2) the project is inadequately communicating the nature of deliverables.
--Pete
4:33 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something
that should
be encouraged.
That's reasonable. What's the rationale for group "Fedora Server"
being visible instead of one of the many hidden groups?
--
Chris Murphy
4:46 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2015 3:33 PM, "Chris Murphy" <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
> In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that
should
> be encouraged.
That's reasonable. What's the rationale for group "Fedora Server"
being visible instead of one of the many hidden groups?
--
Chris Murphy
--
Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no,
can you hide it please?
--Pete
4:53 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com>
wrote:
On Feb 18, 2015 3:33 PM, "Chris Murphy" <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
>
> > In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that
should
> > be encouraged.
>
> That's reasonable. What's the rationale for group "Fedora Server"
> being visible instead of one of the many hidden groups?
>
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
> --
>
Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no, can you hide
it please?
"Fedora Server" is an environment group. It's used to pick the Fedora Server
product when using the network install.
9:11 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com>
wrote:
Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer
authoritatively.
Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no,
can you hide it please?
"Fedora Server" is an environment group. It's used to pick the Fedora
Server
product when using the network install.
I'm referring to it being visible with 'yum/dnf group list' – where
there's a huge pile of groups that aren't listed unless 'yum/dnf group
list hidden' is used. So why visible if we'd like to discourage
sidegrades?
--
Chris Murphy
7:48 a.m.
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 20:11 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher
<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
> Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
>
> Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no,
> can you hide it please?
>
>
> "Fedora Server" is an environment group. It's used to pick the Fedora
Server
> product when using the network install.
I'm referring to it being visible with 'yum/dnf group list' – where
there's a huge pile of groups that aren't listed unless 'yum/dnf group
list hidden' is used. So why visible if we'd like to discourage
sidegrades?
Yum/DNF always displays all Environment Groups. There's no "hidden"
option for them.
9:45 a.m.
On 02/19/2015 07:48 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 20:11 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
>
>> Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
>>
>> Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no,
>> can you hide it please?
>>
>>
>> "Fedora Server" is an environment group. It's used to pick the
Fedora Server
>> product when using the network install.
>
> I'm referring to it being visible with 'yum/dnf group list' – where
> there's a huge pile of groups that aren't listed unless 'yum/dnf group
> list hidden' is used. So why visible if we'd like to discourage
> sidegrades?
Yum/DNF always displays all Environment Groups. There's no "hidden"
option for them.
Wondering out loud.....since the list is starting to grow rather large,
should an RFE be submitted for dnf grouplist {environments,groups} or
something to that effect?
--
Dan Mossor, RHCSA
Systems Engineer at Large
Fedora Plasma Product WG | Fedora QA Team | Fedora Server WG
Fedora Infrastructure Apprentice
FAS: dmossor IRC: danofsatx
San Antonio, Texas, USA
7:49 p.m.
Found my bug on this - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157258
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Murphy" <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases"
<test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:57:45 PM
Subject: Convert nonproduct to productX
Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
work but it fails:
# dnf group install "Fedora Server"
Using metadata from Mon Feb 16 21:33:49 2015
Error: package firewalld-config-standard-0.3.13-2.fc22.noarch
conflicts with system-release-server provided by
fedora-release-server-22-0.12.noarch
The only suggestion I'm finding so far is using fedup --product=server
but that seems meant for doing a product convert in the course of an n
n+1 upgrade. The group install seems like it ought to work. Same
error happens using yum.
Funny enough, if I 'dnf remove firewalld-config-standard' the
resolution ends up being a (partial?) conversion to fedora-server by
removing firewalld-config-standard and fedora-release-nonproduct, and
then installing a pile of server things including cockpit and
fedora-release-server.
So the question really is, is conversion supposed to be possible, and
if so should it be possible with group install, and where are the bugs
to be filed, if any?
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
1:33 p.m.
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 18:49 -0700, Bodhi Zazen wrote:
Found my bug on this -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157258
See also
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F21_bugs#environment-product-confli...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1160917 , which
are kind of in the same genre.
Basically it's a limitation of the somewhat icky way products/flavors
are currently implemented. There's a long-term plan to do it much more
nicely which requires certain RPM capabilities that it doesn't have
yet; apparently we're *hoping* they arrive in F23.
I have floated to mattdm/sgallagh the possibility of simplifying the
current attempt to handle -config-(product) subpackages. Currently the
idea is they get pulled in when the package that needs the config is
installed, relying on some rather specific RPM depsolving behaviour.
IMHO this leads to more trouble than it's worth, especially since the
only -config-(product) packages we actually *have* are ones which it
would be pretty safe to simply stick directly in the relevant env
groups, as the packages that use them should pretty much always be
installed. But there's some details to be worked out if we want to
change that, too.
I'd agree with Pete that this isn't *really* something we intend to
'support'; you're supposed to pick a product by, well, installing that
product (and, as a one-time thing, on fedup from <21). You're not
really supposed to 'convert' installs like this.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
4:45 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
<adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
I'd agree with Pete that this isn't *really* something we
intend to
'support'; you're supposed to pick a product by, well, installing that
product (and, as a one-time thing, on fedup from <21). You're not
really supposed to 'convert' installs like this.
OK.
From this page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedUp
I can't actually tell what the default behavior is for --product if
it's not specified. Does the user get a nonproduct upgrade or do they
get workstation? If the former, then it's possible there are people
will want a means to get a product specific side grade (same version,
different product).
--
Chris Murphy
6:21 p.m.
On 02/18/2015 04:45 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
<adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> I'd agree with Pete that this isn't *really* something we intend to
> 'support'; you're supposed to pick a product by, well, installing that
> product (and, as a one-time thing, on fedup from <21). You're not
> really supposed to 'convert' installs like this.
OK.
From this page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedUp
I can't actually tell what the default behavior is for --product if
it's not specified. Does the user get a nonproduct upgrade or do they
get workstation? If the former, then it's possible there are people
will want a means to get a product specific side grade (same version,
different product).
IIRC, if you don't supply --product, it returns a "Usage" error, IOW
the
--product specifier is required.
Otherwise, see if you can glean any pertinent info from the
cloud-to-server code[0]. It appears to work splendidly.
[0] https://github.com/Rorosha/cloudtoserver/blob/master/cloudtoserver
--
Dan Mossor
Systems Engineer at Large
Fedora KDE WG | Fedora QA Team | Fedora Server SIG
Fedora Infrastructure Apprentice
FAS: dmossor IRC: danofsatx
San Antonio, Texas, USA
9:13 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Dan Mossor <danofsatx(a)gmail.com> wrote:
IIRC, if you don't supply --product, it returns a
"Usage" error, IOW the
--product specifier is required.
OK good. So no user is unwittingly ending up with some outcome they
haven't signed up for.
--
Chris Murphy
3375
days inactive
3377
days old
13 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Adam Williamson -
Bodhi Zazen -
Chris Murphy -
Dan Mossor -
Pete Travis -
Stephen Gallagher