On Tue, 09.10.12 01:00, Miloslav Trmač (mitr@xxxxxxxx) wrote: > > is any current data > > available about how our minimal footprint got worse/better over time in > > both terms of packages and disk space, and which packages are to blame > > for it? > > > > If the libmicrohttpd dep really is problematic I am happy to split it > > off, but I'd really like some hard data first whether doing this would > > help more than a trivial bit to achieve a smaller minimal installation > > set. > > One more network-listening service, let alone an unauthenticated one, > is way "more than a trivial bit" IMHO. > > The disk space aspect is by far the most negligible of the four > reasons for a minimal installation I have mentioned earlier today. > (The cost of a megabyte of storage is practically indistinguishable > from zero, and even multiplied by the number of Fedora users it is not > a number that would inspire much work.) If you are curious about > specific data, I don't have it available; I'll ask around. Well, I actually believe the disk space matters, since copying 1000 container images around with each costing 50M is quite a difference from each costing 500M. I wrote this little script now to generate a minimal container installation: http://0pointer.de/public/miss.sh.txt This will simply install SSH, systemd, passwd, and rpm into some directory. This is enough to boot cleanly into it via "systemd-nspawn -b -D <somedirectory>", and then log in and shut down the container again. Note that this is much more minimal than what Fedora considers the basic set. i.e. no kernel (not needed for a container), no syslog (yay for the journal!) and lacking a few other things. Here's the data I gathered of the previous releases: http://0pointer.de/public/miss/ The number of packages this pulls in: Fedora 15: 131 Fedora 16: 134 Fedora 17: 120 Fedora 18: 106 We got much better here! Great work by everybody involved! The disk space this takes up on disk: Fedora 15: 591M Fedora 16: 617M Fedora 17: 442M Fedora 18: 434M Which is pretty OK, too, I guess. To build such an image I'd really would have preferred not installing the docs. It appears rpm once had a feature for that where you could add excludedocs in rpmrc. This feature seems to have been removed. Why? Can we get that back? Or can I enable this for yum in some other way? Anyone has an idea? >From the list of packages this minimal set still installs, that I'd really like to see gone: chkconfig gamin info systemd-sysv But otherwise there's very little to really complain about I must admit. Heads off to everybody involved in reducing the minimal installatation set size. And sorry for assuming this initiative was dead. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
