Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 14:23 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> 
> So splitting out networkd would be possible, but it's smallish (<1MB)
> and doesn't bring in extra deps.

It would, however, allow us to finally solve all incarnations of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1313085 and friends, if you
put the tmpfiles.d bit for systemd-resolved's resolv.conf symlink in
the subpackage and we didn't include it in any Fedora builds that don't
use resolved.
-- Adam WilliamsonFedora QA Community MonkeyIRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora 
| XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . nethttp://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 10:11:52AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On Mo, 2016-03-07 at 15:56 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> > > Does this mean we can install systemd into a base container without
> > > systemd-udev?
> > > And without systemd-container?
> > Yep. That's more or less the point of the change.
> 
> Plans to split out more?
> 
> console setup comes to mind.  was mentioned on the list recently that
> this is quite big because it pulls in keymaps as dependency.  And it's
> also something you don't need in a container.
> 
> Maybe also network (networkd/resolved) given that fedora uses
> networkmanager by default.  Probably hasn't a big effect on the main
> package size though.

The problem is that various systemd components use each other a lot,
so there are various cross-dependencies, and we quickly get to the
point of diminishing returns. You can see the upstream discussion
[e.g. the thread around [1]]. Creating a hell of little packages does
not make sense, especially considering that if you miss something you
might end up with an unbootable system.

Only subpackages that are
a) at least a few megabytes or bring in dependencies on libraries that are
not shared by the rest of systemd,
b) are "leaf" components which are not required by other systemd components,
are useful candidates for splitting out.

So splitting out networkd would be possible, but it's smallish (<1MB)
and doesn't bring in extra deps.

OTOH, the console setup stuff could be a useful candidate because of
deps.  I have to admit I haven't looked into that. Maybe we could move
the console setup stuff over to systemd-udev subpackage. You only do
console setup if you have hardware (?).

Zbyszek

[1] 
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-November/034963.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Gerd Hoffmann]

On Mo, 2016-03-07 at 15:56 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> > Does this mean we can install systemd into a base container without
> > systemd-udev?
> > And without systemd-container?
> Yep. That's more or less the point of the change.

Plans to split out more?

console setup comes to mind.  was mentioned on the list recently that
this is quite big because it pulls in keymaps as dependency.  And it's
also something you don't need in a container.

Maybe also network (networkd/resolved) given that fedora uses
networkmanager by default.  Probably hasn't a big effect on the main
package size though.

cheers,
  Gerd
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Does this mean we can install systemd into a base container without
> systemd-udev?
> And without systemd-container?
Yep. That's more or less the point of the change.

Zbyszek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Daniel J Walsh]

On 03/05/2016 03:09 PM, Haïkel wrote:

2016-03-04 23:36 GMT+01:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek :

Hi,

I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
[https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
Installing:
  systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 353 k
  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
  systemd-udev   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 1.2 M
  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
Upgrading:
  systemdx86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 5.1 M
  systemd-libs   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 452 k
  ...

(systemd-udev provides udevd and hardware support, systemd-container provides
machinectl and other tools to manager containers and VMs.)

Comps 'core' group includes systemd-udev as mandatory and systemd-container
as optional, so they should be present in new installs.
Please check that you have systemd-udev package installed after an upgrade.
If you are building containers, things should be functional without either
of those new packages.
Otherwise, please holler on the bugzilla or here.

Zbyszek


Great news!
Thank you for keeping us up to date;)



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org


Does this mean we can install systemd into a base container without 
systemd-udev?

And without systemd-container?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 08:30:15AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 4.3.2016 v 23:36 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> > I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
> > [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
> > If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
> > Installing:
> >  systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 
> > 353 k
> 
> Just to be sure - the dist tag in your example confuse me little - this is 
> only F24+ and it will not be backported to
> F23. Right?
Yes, F24+ only. Oops, I was also testing on a F23 laptop and pasted from there.

Zbyszek

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 4.3.2016 v 23:36 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
> [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
> If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
> Installing:
>  systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 353 
> k

Just to be sure - the dist tag in your example confuse me little - this is only 
F24+ and it will not be backported to
F23. Right?

-- 
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Haïkel]

2016-03-04 23:36 GMT+01:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek :
> Hi,
>
> I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
> [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
> If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
> Installing:
>  systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 353 
> k
>  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
>  systemd-udev   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 1.2 
> M
>  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
> Upgrading:
>  systemdx86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 5.1 
> M
>  systemd-libs   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 452 
> k
>  ...
>
> (systemd-udev provides udevd and hardware support, systemd-container provides
> machinectl and other tools to manager containers and VMs.)
>
> Comps 'core' group includes systemd-udev as mandatory and systemd-container
> as optional, so they should be present in new installs.
> Please check that you have systemd-udev package installed after an upgrade.
> If you are building containers, things should be functional without either
> of those new packages.
> Otherwise, please holler on the bugzilla or here.
>
> Zbyszek


Great news!
Thank you for keeping us up to date;)


> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 10:36:01PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today

Exciting — thanks!


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:29:46PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> The %_udevrulesdir macro stays in the main systemd package. Is that
> on purpose?

Maybe not on purpose ;), but I think it's OK, and things would break
otherwise. Packages that have BuildRequires:systemd get the macro.
OTOH, systemd-udev requires systemd, so if you depend on that you'll
get the macro too, although I don't think that requiring systemd-udev
at build time makes much sense.

Zbyszek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Miro Hrončok]

On 4.3.2016 23:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

Hi,

I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
[https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
Installing:
  systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 353 k
  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
  systemd-udev   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 1.2 M
  replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
Upgrading:
  systemdx86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 5.1 M
  systemd-libs   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 452 k
  ...

(systemd-udev provides udevd and hardware support, systemd-container provides
machinectl and other tools to manager containers and VMs.)

Comps 'core' group includes systemd-udev as mandatory and systemd-container
as optional, so they should be present in new installs.
Please check that you have systemd-udev package installed after an upgrade.
If you are building containers, things should be functional without either
of those new packages.
Otherwise, please holler on the bugzilla or here.

Zbyszek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org



The %_udevrulesdir macro stays in the main systemd package. Is that on 
purpose?

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

HEADS UP: systemd package split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

Hi,

I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
[https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
Installing:
 systemd-container  x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 353 k
 replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
 systemd-udev   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 1.2 M
 replacing  systemd.x86_64 222-13.fc23
Upgrading:
 systemdx86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 5.1 M
 systemd-libs   x86_64 229-5.fc23@commandline 452 k
 ...

(systemd-udev provides udevd and hardware support, systemd-container provides
machinectl and other tools to manager containers and VMs.)

Comps 'core' group includes systemd-udev as mandatory and systemd-container
as optional, so they should be present in new installs.
Please check that you have systemd-udev package installed after an upgrade.
If you are building containers, things should be functional without either
of those new packages.
Otherwise, please holler on the bugzilla or here.

Zbyszek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org