On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 07:22 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > that is, with the old spin-kickstarts and without the above update,
> > we're 19215872 bytes oversize; with the update but old spin-kickstarts,
> > we're 17118720 bytes oversize (the update saves ~2.1MB); and with the
> > update and lat
On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 15:21 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) said:
> >> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
> >> Matthias Clasen wrote:
> >> >rpm db 82M
> >>
> >> I vaguely remember a discussion abo
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:53:14 +0300,
Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 06/24/2013 03:27 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
The __db.* files hopefully are not included on live images to begin
with. It might be possible to drop the indexes too: current rpm
Those are the files I was referring to and my
On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 09:15 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) said:
> > On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
> > Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > >rpm db 82M
> >
> > I vaguely remember a discussion about dropping this for live images
> > because it gets reb
On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 09:14 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > - We have both js and mozjs17. js is still used by gjs, libpeas,
> > libproxy-mozjs and gnome-shell. Possible savings: 7M
>
> I thought Colin was fixing everything to use mosjz17. Is that a F-20
> thing?
It missed f19, yes.
--
devel
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) said:
>> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
>> Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> >rpm db 82M
>>
>> I vaguely remember a discussion about dropping this for live images
>> because it gets rebuilt ever
Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) said:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
> Matthias Clasen wrote:
> >rpm db 82M
>
> I vaguely remember a discussion about dropping this for live images
> because it gets rebuilt every boot when needed. My memory is that we
> ended up removing th
> - We have both js and mozjs17. js is still used by gjs, libpeas,
> libproxy-mozjs and gnome-shell. Possible savings: 7M
I thought Colin was fixing everything to use mosjz17. Is that a F-20
thing?
Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
- Original Message -
> - Original Message -
> > On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 22:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > https://bugzilla.
- Original Message -
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 22:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426 - "19 Fin
On 06/24/2013 03:27 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
Matthias Clasen wrote:
rpm db 82M
I vaguely remember a discussion about dropping this for live images
because it gets rebuilt every boot when needed. My memory is that we
ended up removing this
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 07:25:50PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >On my F19 desktop, I have 530MB under /usr/share/locale; this compresses
> >down to 94MB with xz -- 67MB with xz -9. And we're xz-ing the livecd and RPM
> >payloads, right?
> The live images get compressed at the end, so looking at
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 18:04:55 -0400,
Matthias Clasen wrote:
rpm db 82M
I vaguely remember a discussion about dropping this for live images because
it gets rebuilt every boot when needed. My memory is that we ended up
removing this data while building live images, but haven't lo
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 20:17:23 -0400,
Matthew Miller wrote:
On my F19 desktop, I have 530MB under /usr/share/locale; this compresses
down to 94MB with xz -- 67MB with xz -9. And we're xz-ing the livecd and RPM
payloads, right?
The live images get compressed at the end, so looking at the p
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 06:04:55PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> come F20. Here are some sizes as found on the current desktop spin:
These are on-disk sizes, right, not RPM size?
> translations 402M
On my F19 desktop, I have 530MB under /usr/share/locale; this compresses
down to 94MB with xz
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 06:04:55PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> - Both festival and flite are getting pulled in by speech-dispatcher.
> Possible savings: 9M. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799140
The festival package needs to be update to the latest version, a possible
F20 feature.
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 22:51 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> So here's some results.
>
> f2e707287dd82cccb05a3fef6b75cb356744ca58 (Jun 14), no update: 1019215872
> f2e707287dd82cccb05a3fef6b75cb356744ca58 (Jun 14), update: 1017118720
> 1a0c28fdf638796bda60ed2785f95eac16a85b65 (Jun 22), update: 100
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 04:01:20PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 07:20:20PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > 1) no one really uses the desktop image as a basis for cloud
> Some classes at a large university where I used to work do.
> Also see http://adam.younglogic.com/2012/09/vm
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 07:20:20PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> 1) no one really uses the desktop image as a basis for cloud
Some classes at a large university where I used to work do.
Also see http://adam.younglogic.com/2012/09/vm-from-live-cd/
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁
On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 19:22 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 09:44 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> >
> >> 2) We don't have to set a limit at all. Just include the stuff we want
> >> to include (and try to optimize that to be as small
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 09:44 +0200, drago01 wrote:
>
>> 2) We don't have to set a limit at all. Just include the stuff we want
>> to include (and try to optimize that to be as small as possible).
>
> Let's be realistic: 'trying to optimize t
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 07:24:15AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > Just because someone decided "there has to be a size limit and if we
>> > don't meet that target we block the release" does
>> > not mean that this is the right thing to d
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 07:24:15AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Just because someone decided "there has to be a size limit and if we
> > don't meet that target we block the release" does
> > not mean that this is the right thing to do (note: it isn't). A limit
> > only makes sense if you targe
On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 09:44 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> 2) We don't have to set a limit at all. Just include the stuff we want
> to include (and try to optimize that to be as small as possible).
Let's be realistic: 'trying to optimize that to be as small as possible'
only happens when we have a limit
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 18:51 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> > I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess baggage
>> > from /usr/share/doc (duplicate docs,
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess baggage
>> from /usr/share/doc (duplicate docs, large ChangeLog files, etc). It
>> touches nothing outside /usr/
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 22:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426 - "19 Final TC1
> > > x86_64 Desktop Live is overs
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426 - "19 Final TC1
> > x86_64 Desktop Live is oversized (larger than 1 GB)" - desktop team (I
> > know you're working on
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 18:51 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess baggage
> > from /usr/share/doc (duplicate docs, large ChangeLog files, etc). It
> > touches nothing outside /
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess baggage
> from /usr/share/doc (duplicate docs, large ChangeLog files, etc). It
> touches nothing outside /usr/share/doc, so should be fairly safe to let
> in. That will proba
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426 - "19 Final TC1
> > x86_64 Desktop Live is oversized (larger than 1 GB)" - desktop team (I
> > know you're working on
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 14:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426 - "19 Final TC1
> x86_64 Desktop Live is oversized (larger than 1 GB)" - desktop team (I
> know you're working on it)
I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess
Hey folks, time for another F19 Final status update!
We're looking relatively hopeful at this point, but still some work to
be done.
Outstanding blockers
We need fixes for:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924162 - "A software
selection with dependency errors is
33 matches
Mail list logo
