Trimming down the package set

Fri Mar 20 13:22:24 UTC 2015

On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 15:28 -0500, Dan Mossor wrote:
> On 03/19/2015 09:45 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 22:08 -0500, Dan Mossor wrote:
> > > On 02/09/2015 03:31 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > > So, at DevConf over the weekend, I had a conversation with 
> > > > several people around the package set that we should include 
> > > > on the Fedora Server install media in Fedora 22.
> > > > 
> > > > When we put together the install media for Fedora 21, we 
> > > > basically took the old Fedora 20 DVD install and stripped out 
> > > > some of the things we didn't feel were necessary for the 
> > > > Server. However, I suspect that we may have missed numerous 
> > > > things that are not
> > > > *strictly* important for Server.
> > > > 
> > > > In particular, the Fedora Server DVD includes the package 
> > > > groups for many of the Fedora development tools (particularly 
> > > > those
> > > > useful for developing Fedora *itself*, such as the @fedora-
> > > > packager group.
> > > > 
> > > > I don't currently have statistics on how much space this would 
> > > > save on the installation DVD (since I would pretty much have 
> > > > to build one without these packages to verify it), but I can 
> > > > get an approximate idea of the difference by installing the 
> > > > minimal set of Server packages on one VM and a set that 
> > > > includes the devel packages on another.
> > > > 
> > > > The result I see is:
> > > > == Standard Server Install ==
> > > > * 614 packages
> > > > * 1,097 MB on the installed system
> > > > 
> > > > == Server Install Plus Development Tools ==
> > > > * 716 packages
> > > > * 1496 MB on the installed system.
> > > > 
> > > > Even if we assume a (very) generous assumption that the RPM
> > > > compression reduces the size difference by 50%, we still see a 
> > > > probable savings of 200 MB on the install DVD.
> > > > 
> > > > So, my questions to the Server SIG:
> > > > 1) Is this savings in the DVD ISO download size sufficiently
> > > > significant to continue this conversation?
> > > > 2) Does anyone see any value in keeping this material *on the
> > > > DVD*? Obviously, all of these packages will remain available 
> > > > to the network install or post-installation environments.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > For those who are interested in minutiae, I am attaching the
> > > > current fedora-install-server.ks file that is used to generate 
> > > > the DVD. If you see anything else there that might be worth 
> > > > including in this discussion, I'm all ears.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > server mailing list
> > > > server at lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
> > > > 
> > > This is a bit late to the party, but I've been having other 
> > > issues with  email that prevented me from replying earlier. 
> > > However,
> > > recently Stephen
> > > and I have been discussing some things on IRC that I found 
> > > contained within the hardware-support comp group[0]. 
> > > Specifically:
> > > 
> > > atmel-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > b43-fwcutter - wireless adapter support
> > > b43-openfwwf - wireless adapter support
> > > ipw2100-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > ipw2200-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl100-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl1000-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl105-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl135-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl2000-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl2030-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl3160-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl3945-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl4965-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl5000-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl5150-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl6000-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl6000g2a-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl6000g2b-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl6050-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > iwl7260-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > libertas-usb8388-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > usb_modeswitch - 3G / LTE modem support
> > > zd1211-firmware - wireless adapter support
> > > acpi - limited laptop information reader (no activity since 
> > > 2010) acpitool - laptop harware support
> > > cmospwd - BIOS password recovery (dead project)
> > > firmware-addon-dell - for older Dell desktops and workstations 
> > > gpsd - GPS adapter support
> > > gpsd-clients - GPS adapter support
> > > gypsy - GPS adapter support
> > > i8kutils - for Dell Inspiron and Latitude laptops
> > > iscan-firmware - scanner support
> > > isight-firmware-tools - scanner support
> > > ivtv-firmware - Hauppage TV card support
> > > libifp - iRiver MP3 device support
> > > multican - Cannon camera support
> > > openct - smartcard support
> > > opensc - smartcard support
> > > pcsc-lite - smartcard support
> > > pcsc-lite-ccid - smartcard support
> > > 
> > > Essentially, all but 2 of the entire comp group are not 
> > > applicable to  servers. The Hardware Support comp group's 
> > > description reads "This group
> > > is a collection of tools for various hardware specific 
> > > utilities." All  of the hardware addressed by these packages are 
> > > specific to wireless,  laptop, desktop or peripheral devices.
> > > 
> > > In my experience, servers are not equipped with wireless
> > > communications.
> > > The few times I have seen it even advertised was to support OOB 
> > > (out of  band) management through the ILO interface, not part of 
> > > the installed  operating system.
> > > 
> > > Servers that utilize specific peripherals should only support 
> > > the desired peripheral, not the entire random group that pulls 
> > > in more than  is required for a server installation.
> > > 
> > > Additionally, I've filed bugs[1,2] to have fprintd-pam and  
> > > wireless- tools moved from the Standard comps group to the 
> > > Hardware  Support group, since even on workstation installs 
> > > these two packages are dependent on specific hardware, and 
> > > shouldn't be included in the Standard comp group.
> > > 
> > > A possible solution that Stephen and I have worked out is to 
> > > create a
> > >   new Server Hardware Support comp group that would include more
> > > server-specific tools such as (but not limited to):
> > > 
> > > smp_utils
> > > lm_sensors
> > > openhpi
> > > 
> > > These are the first three that I found in my limited research, 
> > > I'm sure  there are many more that can be justified to be 
> > > included as part of a  Server Hardware Support comp group.
> > > 
> > > --Dan
> > > 
> > > [0] 
> > > https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/comps.git/tree/comps-f22.xml.in[1]
> > > 
> > >   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1198844[2]
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1198832
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Find attached a first pass at this hardware support. I left one of 
> > the Dell SMBIOS packages on the list, simply because there are 
> > some old servers that also share it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > server mailing list
> > server at lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/server
> > 
> Looks good to me. I'm still researching other useful hardware 
> packages,  but I think we've uncovered the most common already.
> 

I should also note that this isn't trimming down the package set on 
the DVD media; I'm still including the old hardware support as an 
optional installation. It will reduce the size of the installed system 
somewhat, though.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/attachments/20150320/31aeda22/attachment.sig>