On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 13:20 +0100, FranÃois Cami wrote: > >> Of course, we could look at things differently: for a package to be >> marked critpath, it should have users or be a dependency of some other >> package with users. > > This is pretty inevitably implicit in the current definition of critpath > - packages that are necessary to boot the system and use it. :) Okay, > there's slightly unexpected cases like openldap, which isn't necessary > for most people to login and use their systems but gets brought in > because it's a dependency of various auth mechanisms which *optionally > support* LDAP, but even that is obviously used by >0 people. jlaska just gave me the list of packages marked critpath in rawhide: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide-20101202/logs/critpath.txt 389-ds, cobbler, httpd, libvirt, mysql, postgresql, puppet, vsftpd are not in the list. My guess is therefore that most server packages are completely ignored by the critpath definition. And we have server users. >> And packages with enough known users should always land in critpath, >> otherwise we might break systems users depend on. > > That doesn't fit in with the current function-based definition, so your > proposal is to change that? Yes. Note that the current function-based definition is contained in the "have users"-based one, as long as Fedora is used on the desktop, that is. >> At this point, non-critpath packages may be left to their maintainers' wishes. > > maybe we could have a three-tier system - critpath, commonly used, > other. Works for me, as long as "commonly" used is at the very least smoke-tested, but I guess that was your intention since there is an "other" set :) > but we don't really have any very reliable methods for > determining use of packages yet. We could extend smolt to do so. FranÃois -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
