[Bug 1123721] New: suse-module-tools must not depend on mkintird / dracut
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721 Bug ID: 1123721 Summary: suse-module-tools must not depend on mkintird / dracut Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: martin.wilck@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Discussion on https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/657402 and via email. Email from Dominique Leuenberger, 2019-01-24 ------------- Some more thinking and tinkering around the problems with suse-module- tools - and your https://github.com/openSUSE/rpm-config-SUSE/pull/6 Adding a runtime dependency from suse-module-tools to dracut is a bad thing (with the current setup), as you already know: * coreutils buildrequires suse-module-tools in order to get the initrd macros in place. * coreutils is part of the distro bootstrap cycle (which is already large/too large). Adding dracut (plus dependency chain) into this cycle will make it close to impossible to bootstrap any new distro, namely SLE16 This shall not mean that dracut as a dependency on suse-module-tools is wrong per se, and as you did in the last weeks, we should try to find a solution for this issue, and I think the started path is not the worst: * we remove the macro to rebuild the initrd from suse-module-tools, and move that to a common place (rpm-config-SUSE comes to mind, it already contains commonly used macros) * With this, coreutils could completely give up on the dependency on suse-module-tools, which means s-module-tools could be downgraded from a ring0 to a ring1 package. The macro is already smart enough to skipt over the execution of /usr/lib/module-init-tools/regenerate-initrd- posttrans if it does not exist * An additional problem will show up though: dracut requires suse- module-tools, and suse-module-tools will require dracut. To break that cycle in OBS you will have to add a "#!BuildIgnore: suse-module-tools" to suse-module-tools.spec. This way forward would solve the technical difficulties we have around building a self-contained distro, without making it harder on the distro maintainers AND will allow us to add a dependency to s-m-t that is being interpreted by OBS (or we could even add a fileprovides then - once coreutils no longer cares for it) If any mail recipient has a valid reason AGAINST this plan, please speak up - but please also offer alternative solutions. Otherwise, let's get things moving. There are still two ring0 packages that will need touching (rpm-config-SUSE and coreutils) - and ring0 packages are 'tough' as they put a high load onto the distro build, meaning stagins willing to take them are scarse. ------------- https://github.com/openSUSE/rpm-config-SUSE/pull/6 has been accepted for rpm-config-SUSE. The initrd-related macros have _not_ been removed from suse-module-tools yet (15.0.20). The dependency on mkinitrd has been replaced by a weak "recommends". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Martin Wilck
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Martin Wilck
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Martin Wilck
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Martin Wilck
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c1
--- Comment #1 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c2
--- Comment #2 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c7
--- Comment #7 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c8
--- Comment #8 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
Swamp Workflow Management
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c10
--- Comment #10 from Martin Wilck
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c11
--- Comment #11 from Ludwig Nussel
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c12
--- Comment #12 from Martin Wilck
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c13
--- Comment #13 from Ludwig Nussel
Should we check "$container", maybe?
Don't think so :-)
I suppose there are some other exceptions where it doesn't hurt to fail building the initrd (like Kiwi), but in all other situations, a warning would be in order.
There is no error nor warning if suse-module-tools is not installed either: https://github.com/openSUSE/rpm-config-SUSE/blob/master/macros.d/macros.init... I suppose also for specially tailored systems a kernel without initrd could be perfectly fine. So I just wouldn't print anything really. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c14
--- Comment #14 from Martin Wilck
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c15
--- Comment #15 from Ludwig Nussel
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c16
--- Comment #16 from Martin Wilck
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123721#c18
Martin Wilck
participants (2)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com -
bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com