I'm less concerned about x86_64 for Beta, but i686 not fitting on a CD is a stop ship. We're 43~megs over size. That's not a small amount. This may have been brought up before, but I don't see archives of it so it may have been IRC only.
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-live-...
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
and
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
are the configs used.
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
Herm. this may actually be a diff of the Education-Math live image to the Alpha Desktop image. I made a mistake somewhere. I'm re-creating the Desktop image, although they share many of the same packages.
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
Herm. this may actually be a diff of the Education-Math live image to the Alpha Desktop image. I made a mistake somewhere. I'm re-creating the Desktop image, although they share many of the same packages.
I fixed the diff. It is now correct, and we're still 43 megs oversize.
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 19:27 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
Herm. this may actually be a diff of the Education-Math live image to the Alpha Desktop image. I made a mistake somewhere. I'm re-creating the Desktop image, although they share many of the same packages.
I fixed the diff. It is now correct, and we're still 43 megs oversize.
If empathy didn't have a hard requires on some of it's plugins, like telepathy-haze (which pulls in libpurple) that would drop 20MB or more. IMO, the only hard-requires for empathy should probably be telepathy-gabble (XMMP) & telepathy-salut (local-link XMMP), the rest we should give a hard look at what we want to use a default in comps to reduce some of the bloat.
Later, /B
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 22:51 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
If empathy didn't have a hard requires on some of it's plugins, like telepathy-haze (which pulls in libpurple) that would drop 20MB or more. IMO, the only hard-requires for empathy should probably be telepathy-gabble (XMMP) & telepathy-salut (local-link XMMP), the rest we should give a hard look at what we want to use a default in comps to reduce some of the bloat.
I do agree that this adds a hefty chunk of size to the image; but if we do not keep the Haze and other telepathy stack components in it, then it becomes a severe regression from previous releases' Live images, which I'd also dislike to have happen. :-/
The gnome-games-help package is fairly big for this (nearly half of what we need to free up); is this strictly required for the LiveCD?
--Peter
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 20:57 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 22:51 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
If empathy didn't have a hard requires on some of it's plugins, like telepathy-haze (which pulls in libpurple) that would drop 20MB or more. IMO, the only hard-requires for empathy should probably be telepathy-gabble (XMMP) & telepathy-salut (local-link XMMP), the rest we should give a hard look at what we want to use a default in comps to reduce some of the bloat.
I do agree that this adds a hefty chunk of size to the image; but if we do not keep the Haze and other telepathy stack components in it, then it becomes a severe regression from previous releases' Live images, which I'd also dislike to have happen. :-/
That's why I said we should look at what to include in the comps, and not put hard requires in the spec. ;)
And there *are* going to be regressions in features even with tp-haze. Empathy won't be able to do things like file-transfers, etc, that Pidgin currently supports.
Later, /B
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 00:21 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
That's why I said we should look at what to include in the comps, and not put hard requires in the spec. ;)
Hmm; but if we put it in comps, it's still going to be included anyway; so in terms of saving space I don't really a difference, tbh.
And there *are* going to be regressions in features even with tp-haze. Empathy won't be able to do things like file-transfers, etc, that Pidgin currently supports.
Well, regressions are an unfortunate necessity sometimes; but when they can be readily minimized, I'd prefer that be the case. ;)
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 21:40 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 00:21 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
That's why I said we should look at what to include in the comps, and not put hard requires in the spec. ;)
Hmm; but if we put it in comps, it's still going to be included anyway; so in terms of saving space I don't really a difference, tbh.
Only if it's marked as default, and I'm saying we should be evaluating what connection managers to mark as default. If it turns out that we do want to use tp-haze as a default, I'm not really seeing what big advantage we are getting by switching to Empathy as our default IM client.
Later, /B
Peter Gordon wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 00:21 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
That's why I said we should look at what to include in the comps, and not put hard requires in the spec. ;)
Hmm; but if we put it in comps, it's still going to be included anyway; so in terms of saving space I don't really a difference, tbh.
No, it's not. It can be pulled in due to being in a comps group, and then be excluded from the compose in the kickstart package manifests, whereas with hard requires trying to remove the dep will result in a failed compose.
-Jeroen
2008/9/22 Brian Pepple bpepple@fedoraproject.org:
If empathy didn't have a hard requires on some of it's plugins, like telepathy-haze (which pulls in libpurple) that would drop 20MB or more. IMO, the only hard-requires for empathy should probably be telepathy-gabble (XMMP) & telepathy-salut (local-link XMMP), the rest we should give a hard look at what we want to use a default in comps to reduce some of the bloat.
That would make it basically only useful for GTalk users which has significant market share only in North America and parts of the Middle East[1]. I don't think there is any kind of upstream story for how you install plugins outside of dropping to a terminal and using yum/apt-get either.
[1] http://billionsconnected.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/global_im_marke...
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 12:47 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
2008/9/22 Brian Pepple bpepple@fedoraproject.org:
If empathy didn't have a hard requires on some of it's plugins, like telepathy-haze (which pulls in libpurple) that would drop 20MB or more. IMO, the only hard-requires for empathy should probably be telepathy-gabble (XMMP) & telepathy-salut (local-link XMMP), the rest we should give a hard look at what we want to use a default in comps to reduce some of the bloat.
That would make it basically only useful for GTalk users which has significant market share only in North America and parts of the Middle East[1].
s/GTalk/all jabber users/
and since we're all about open protocols anyway. And since xmpp is the most widely accepted open IM protocol (in fact it might be the only one that's actually open)....
-sv
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 19:27 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
Herm. this may actually be a diff of the Education-Math live image to the Alpha Desktop image. I made a mistake somewhere. I'm re-creating the Desktop image, although they share many of the same packages.
I fixed the diff. It is now correct, and we're still 43 megs oversize.
An easy win is to exclude gnome-games-help.
2008/9/22 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
Herm. this may actually be a diff of the Education-Math live image to the Alpha Desktop image. I made a mistake somewhere. I'm re-creating the Desktop image, although they share many of the same packages.
I fixed the diff. It is now correct, and we're still 43 megs oversize.
I spent a bit more time looking at this and am concluding we're dying the death of a lot of < 0.5meg cuts. Aside from our old friends, fonts: new package un-core-fonts-batang: 12971087 new package un-core-fonts-dotum: 7769083 new package un-core-fonts-gungseo: 6294199 new package un-core-fonts-dinaru: 3108519
I'm not qualified to evaluate these. Can someone with experience in localization evaluate whether the GNOME desktop coverage is enough to warrant shipping them?
What I'm currently thinking is that the install image needs to be enough to bootstrap to a richer experience such as office tools or a development environment. We need some sort of post-install process that fills out the system with the parts we couldn't fit in the live image, and also suggests things such as OpenOffice. I think the right way to do this is comps; I'll take a look at how we might do this with PackageKit.
Colin Walters (walters@verbum.org) said:
I spent a bit more time looking at this and am concluding we're dying the death of a lot of < 0.5meg cuts. Aside from our old friends, fonts: new package un-core-fonts-batang: 12971087 new package un-core-fonts-dotum: 7769083 new package un-core-fonts-gungseo: 6294199 new package un-core-fonts-dinaru: 3108519
I'm not qualified to evaluate these. Can someone with experience in localization evaluate whether the GNOME desktop coverage is enough to warrant shipping them?
They're all Korean fonts, which certainly seems to be well translated.
Bill
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com wrote:
Colin Walters (walters@verbum.org) said:
I spent a bit more time looking at this and am concluding we're dying the death of a lot of < 0.5meg cuts. Aside from our old friends, fonts: new package un-core-fonts-batang: 12971087 new package un-core-fonts-dotum: 7769083 new package un-core-fonts-gungseo: 6294199 new package un-core-fonts-dinaru: 3108519
I'm not qualified to evaluate these. Can someone with experience in localization evaluate whether the GNOME desktop coverage is enough to warrant shipping them?
They're all Korean fonts, which certainly seems to be well translated.
Ok - then a followup question is: do we need all of them? Who owns the comps sets for $lang-support? Adding fedora-i18n-list and fedora-fonts-list to CC - if you guys are able to cut any of the fonts, particularly the larger ones it would help us greatly.
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 17:41 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
I spent a bit more time looking at this and am concluding we're dying the death of a lot of < 0.5meg cuts.
We need some sort of post-install process that fills out the system with the parts we couldn't fit in the live image
Playing around earlier, I see that
locale -a |grep -F _ |cut -d _ -f 1 | sort -u|wc -l
says that glibc supports 137 language identifiers, munging all variants of a language together as one. So if we had 100% coverage of all localizations throughout our stack, and disregarded any differences between all Spanish, English, etc. variants. and disregarded the size of any actual software on the cd, that gives < 6 megs available per language :-)
And FWIW as a random reference point from F9
du -ch /usr/share/gnome/help/*/de comes to 5.5M
with just...
ekiga eog fedora-release-notes file-roller gcalctool gedit gnome-applets gnome-games gnome-netstatus gnome-panel gnome-terminal gnome-user-docs gucharmap rhythmbox sound-juicer system-config-date system-config-services system-config-users tomboy totem
C.
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
I'm less concerned about x86_64 for Beta, but i686 not fitting on a CD is a stop ship. We're 43~megs over size. That's not a small amount. This may have been brought up before, but I don't see archives of it so it may have been IRC only.
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-live-...
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
and
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
are the configs used.
Not that it's much by way of disk size, but it looks like a lot of the X libs got measurably bigger for no particularly good reason. libXrandr, for example, got almost 40% bigger purely because the ChangeLog in %doc got three times bigger.
Do we care that much about including these? I can't see that they're worth much even on a real system.
In related news, the rpm changelog for initscripts is over 100k and goes back to 1997, which does affect disk size since the live image includes a real rpmdb. glibc is even worse at about 120k, though it only goes back to 2000.
- ajax
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 10:09 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
I'm less concerned about x86_64 for Beta, but i686 not fitting on a CD is a stop ship. We're 43~megs over size. That's not a small amount. This may have been brought up before, but I don't see archives of it so it may have been IRC only.
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-live-...
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
and
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
are the configs used.
Not that it's much by way of disk size, but it looks like a lot of the X libs got measurably bigger for no particularly good reason. libXrandr, for example, got almost 40% bigger purely because the ChangeLog in %doc got three times bigger.
Do we care that much about including these? I can't see that they're worth much even on a real system.
In related news, the rpm changelog for initscripts is over 100k and goes back to 1997, which does affect disk size since the live image includes a real rpmdb. glibc is even worse at about 120k, though it only goes back to 2000.
I believe new versions of rpm will allow us to drop out all but the latest N changelogs. I know that the changelog metadata that createrepo produces now allows us to limit the changelogs we pass along in the xml metadata to the latest N, as well.
I think we should keep the changelogs around in the spec files but not pass around any but say the last 10 inside the actual rpm.
-sv
2008/9/23 Adam Jackson ajax@redhat.com:
Not that it's much by way of disk size, but it looks like a lot of the X libs got measurably bigger for no particularly good reason. libXrandr, for example, got almost 40% bigger purely because the ChangeLog in %doc got three times bigger.
Do we care that much about including these? I can't see that they're worth much even on a real system.
Agree. One possibility if there is resistance to simply dropping them is to move them into the -devel packages.
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
I'm less concerned about x86_64 for Beta, but i686 not fitting on a CD is a stop ship. We're 43~megs over size. That's not a small amount. This may have been brought up before, but I don't see archives of it so it may have been IRC only.
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of the package differences between Alpha and Beta. I would really appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you guys are supposed to own this config now.
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-live-...
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
and
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livec...
are the configs used.
-- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
Some progress. We're down to 23megs or so over. mclasen had a few things to suggest and I did a test compose with it. New diff and other info in the releng ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/824
2008/9/23 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com:
Some progress. We're down to 23megs or so over. mclasen had a few things to suggest and I did a test compose with it. New diff and other info in the releng ticket
Speaking of releng tickets, any thoughts on moving https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/764 forward? I hope with that we can both avoid last-minute surprises like this and make how the images are produced more transparent and consistent.
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 15:11 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
Speaking of releng tickets, any thoughts on moving https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/764 forward? I hope with that we can both avoid last-minute surprises like this and make how the images are produced more transparent and consistent.
There has been some progress, we have some resources to use now, and some space to put things. Getting it automated is going to be looked at after beta.
That said, making a Live image is dirt simple. It requires a rawhide system, and some disk space. That's it. Given that the desktop team owns the config for this (so I'm told) it would interest your team in at least doing some manually or requesting some done manually as we near deadlines (before rather than after..) (:
2008/9/23 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com:
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 15:11 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
Speaking of releng tickets, any thoughts on moving https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/764 forward? I hope with that we can both avoid last-minute surprises like this and make how the images are produced more transparent and consistent.
There has been some progress, we have some resources to use now, and some space to put things. Getting it automated is going to be looked at after beta.
That said, making a Live image is dirt simple. It requires a rawhide system, and some disk space. That's it. Given that the desktop team owns the config for this (so I'm told) it would interest your team in at least doing some manually or requesting some done manually as we near deadlines (before rather than after..) (:
I had spent a bit of time on it a few weeks ago which resulted in the gnome-games-help split and a few other bits but - I agree; we dropped (or at least weren't watching) the ball on this lately.
I do think going forward the right way to approach this is going to be systemic changes like changelog/%doc and even longer term localized distribution rather than cutting functionality. But I'll take another look today to see whether there are some localized changes that can be made.
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 15:11 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
Speaking of releng tickets, any thoughts on moving https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/764 forward? I hope with that we can both avoid last-minute surprises like this and make how the images are produced more transparent and consistent.
There has been some progress, we have some resources to use now, and some space to put things. Getting it automated is going to be looked at after beta.
That said, making a Live image is dirt simple. It requires a rawhide system, and some disk space. That's it. Given that the desktop team owns the config for this (so I'm told) it would interest your team in at least doing some manually or requesting some done manually as we near deadlines (before rather than after..) (:
Since I am playing around with spinning images all the time, I can help with this. If desktop team thinks my participation would be useful, let me know.
Rahul
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Since I am playing around with spinning images all the time, I can help with this. If desktop team thinks my participation would be useful, let me know.
Definitely - any help is appreciated.
Colin Walters wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Since I am playing around with spinning images all the time, I can help with this. If desktop team thinks my participation would be useful, let me know.
Definitely - any help is appreciated.
Is there any place where I can upload images after I create them for wider testing? Is there restrictions on where I can compose them? Should I be de-branding the images?
Rahul
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Colin Walters wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Since I am playing around with spinning images all the time, I can help with this. If desktop team thinks my participation would be useful, let me know.
Definitely - any help is appreciated.
Is there any place where I can upload images after I create them for wider testing? Is there restrictions on where I can compose them? Should I be de-branding the images?
Well, my ideal on this would be that we land the infrastructure for automatically creating them daily or even more frequently, and then we work on committing changes to the kickstart file via peer review.
To help with size issues in particular I don't see a need to distribute the result - it should be enough to describe the change+patch ("moved help files into separately downloadable package", "use bzip2 on changelogs", etc) here.
Colin Walters wrote:
Well, my ideal on this would be that we land the infrastructure for automatically creating them daily or even more frequently, and then we work on committing changes to the kickstart file via peer review.
This would be ideal but I am not sure waiting for it is really the right thing to do. As a side note, OpenSUSE, Ubuntu etc are doing more intermediate alpha and beta releases than Fedora does. We should be considering that. Ubuntu is doing daily builds of images as well.
To help with size issues in particular I don't see a need to distribute the result - it should be enough to describe the change+patch ("moved help files into separately downloadable package", "use bzip2 on changelogs", etc) here.
I think, if we are generating images on a more regular basis, we should be doing more than just checking the size. There is a valuable opportunity for integration testing from the wider community and getting more earlier feedback on experimental changes such as swapping Pidgin with Empathy. This however requires distributing the composed images.
The problems I see with it are these:
1) Bandwidth and disk space
2) How do you trust and verify composes done outside the Fedora infrastructure?
3) Branding conflicts with unofficial composes
Rahul
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 12:06 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
Some progress. We're down to 23megs or so over. mclasen had a few things to suggest and I did a test compose with it. New diff and other info in the releng ticket
I don't see a diff here?
- ajax
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 15:30 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 12:06 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
Some progress. We're down to 23megs or so over. mclasen had a few things to suggest and I did a test compose with it. New diff and other info in the releng ticket
I don't see a diff here?
Oops, I hit preview instead of commit. Reload please.
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Adam Jackson -
Bill Nottingham -
Brian Pepple -
Caolán McNamara -
Colin Walters -
Jeroen van Meeuwen -
Jesse Keating -
Matthias Clasen -
Peter Gordon -
Rahul Sundaram -
Seth Vidal