[opensuse-factory] RFC - what is the purpose/objective of the 'minimum server selection (text mode)' pattern?
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498 For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space. Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later. The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything. (I would not include gdb though). Comments? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.0°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 25.10.2011 10:53, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server.
Which means: nothing installed but sshd. Because nobody knows what kind of services you want to serve
The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
Haha! Tell this to our 7000 VMs. Of course there is sufficient space, but it comes with a hefty price tag.
Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later.
Exactly.
The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything.
This contradicts your previous sentence.
Comments?
Minimal means minimal, and server means no bootsplash ;-) So kernel, glibc, zypper and sshd should be enough. -- Stefan Seyfried "Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body!" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le 25/10/2011 10:53, Per Jessen a écrit :
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space. Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later. The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything. (I would not include gdb though).
Comments?
vi should be installed (not necessarily vim, even if I prefere it), let only because it's the only editor nearly available anywhere so anybody have to know a bit of it. (I use a lot MC, but do not ask for him) zypper *have to be* cnf, why!! use case: I very often use this install to see if the hardware works with openSUSE when the config do not allow live cd (very often in my case) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le 25/10/2011 11:23, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
So kernel, glibc, zypper and sshd should be enough.
and tinyvi (or better busybox) to edit config files... jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10/25/2011 10:53 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space. Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later. The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything. (I would not include gdb though).
Comments?
kernel + ssd running and open in firewall + a slick selection of what is needed to run a server raid,lvm,etc. + tools for admins. but those can be added afterwards. I use syststat,iftop,mc,vim,bash-completion(yeah lazy) -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Ambassador GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 10:53, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server.
Which means: nothing installed but sshd. Because nobody knows what kind of services you want to serve
Yes, that is pretty much correct. There are some basic services needed by the system itself though (postfix, nscd, acpid, dhcpcd, syslog, cron, ntp etc).
The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
Haha! Tell this to our 7000 VMs. Of course there is sufficient space, but it comes with a hefty price tag.
Okay, a point worth considering. Would a 1Gb root filesystem be too much?
Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later.
Exactly.
The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything.
This contradicts your previous sentence.
How? I don't have a complete list ready, but I want things like vim, man, strace, tcpdump and bind-utils available. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.6°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10/25/2011 11:51 AM, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
On 10/25/2011 10:53 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space. Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later. The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything. (I would not include gdb though).
Comments?
kernel + ssd running and open in firewall + a slick selection of what is needed to run a server raid,lvm,etc.
+ tools for admins. but those can be added afterwards. I use syststat,iftop,mc,vim,bash-completion(yeah lazy)
oups I forget, would be highly appreciate to get kernel-default and not kernel-desktop as default -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Ambassador GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
jdd wrote:
Le 25/10/2011 10:53, Per Jessen a écrit :
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space. Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later. The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything. (I would not include gdb though).
Comments?
vi should be installed (not necessarily vim, even if I prefere it), let only because it's the only editor nearly available anywhere so anybody have to know a bit of it.
Yes, a Unix system has to have vim? and in my opinion also 'man'.
(I use a lot MC, but do not ask for him)
zypper *have to be*
cnf, why!!
Only because of the recent broken state of the minimum server selection. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.7°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Dienstag, 25. Oktober 2011 schrieb Stefan Seyfried:
Minimal means minimal, and server means no bootsplash ;-)
So kernel, glibc, zypper and sshd should be enough. You don't need a pattern if you know what you want. And you will most likely don't want yast either - so use studio to create a minimal applicance.
Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
At least for me the resulting size is very important. I always try to keep virtual machines as small as possible to have fast full backups, migration, snapshot restore etc. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10/25/2011 12:31 PM, Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
At least for me the resulting size is very important. I always try to keep virtual machines as small as possible to have fast full backups, migration, snapshot restore etc.
cu, Rudi
That's call JeOS not minimal server -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Ambassador GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server. The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
At least for me the resulting size is very important. I always try to keep virtual machines as small as possible to have fast full backups, migration, snapshot restore etc.
Okay, also a valid point. What sort of size would be acceptable for you? (just wondering, I rarely allocate less than 10G for root). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.2°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
On 10/25/2011 12:31 PM, Ruediger Meier wrote:
At least for me the resulting size is very important. I always try to keep virtual machines as small as possible to have fast full backups, migration, snapshot restore etc.
That's call JeOS not minimal server
Call it like you want. If "minimum server selection" is the smallest openSUSE installation then size matters. Adding a true "JeOS selection" would be nice too. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le 25/10/2011 13:56, Ruediger Meier a écrit :
Adding a true "JeOS selection" would be nice too.
I support this, may you could make an entry in openfate? jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Ruediger Meier wrote:
At least for me the resulting size is very important. I always try to keep virtual machines as small as possible to have fast full backups, migration, snapshot restore etc.
Okay, also a valid point. What sort of size would be acceptable for you? (just wondering, I rarely allocate less than 10G for root).
Usually I have 2-3 GB root partitions even on real machines. That means the installed rpms should consume less than 500MB space. But the topic is not very important to me because minimizing it by myself is not much work and it needs to be done only one time. Then deploying using dd or rsync. More important is to keep the packages itself small and without too much useless dependencies. For example some packages like glibc-32bit/locale, yast, ConsoleKit, etc. are hard to remove. But that's another topic. Maybe a little optimizing 'minimum server selection' for size too would discover some of the ugly dependencies by the way. Solving them could be also useful for all the other patterns. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2011/10/25 11:39 (GMT+0200) jdd composed:
Le 25/10/2011 11:23, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
So kernel, glibc, zypper and sshd should be enough.
and tinyvi (or better busybox) to edit config files...
Nano makes more sense to me if mc by default can't hapen. It's intuitive, quite unlike any variation on vi that I've ever seen. Minimal should probably also have zypp.conf set to solver.onlyRequires=true as well. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 25.10.2011 11:54, Per Jessen wrote:
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 10:53, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server.
Which means: nothing installed but sshd. Because nobody knows what kind of services you want to serve
Yes, that is pretty much correct. There are some basic services needed by the system itself though (postfix, nscd, acpid, dhcpcd, syslog, cron, ntp etc).
Of course I was a bit exaggerating towards the "embedded" side. However, neither acpid, nscd, dhcpcd, cron or ntp are strictly necessary. They can be installed later. (I would include dhcpcd still, "minimal" should at least be able to get a network connection so that stuff actually *can* be installed later ;-) XEN guests run very fine without acpid :) (yes, I know. acpid is small, just an example)
The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
Haha! Tell this to our 7000 VMs. Of course there is sufficient space, but it comes with a hefty price tag.
Okay, a point worth considering. Would a 1Gb root filesystem be too much?
Multiply the 500MB more with the 7000VMs. Look up the price per TB on your favourite storage vendor. Does that answer the question? :-) "minimal" being "minimal" is something I consider valuable. Probably two different "minimal" patterns would really be more useful: * minimal server (text mode) * minimal remotely useful server :-) the second one probably better would be "text mode server". Means: basically a pretty complete installation, good vim, aaa_base-extras, maybe even mc, but no graphical desktop and according libs. The problem is that both pattern need a maintainer. Ludwig is maintaining the "minimal server" pattern and is maintaining it towards "less is better". I'm fine with that. If you are bothered enough by it, maybe you could volunteer to maintain the "text mode full server" pattern? As you have experienced with the broken pattern in 11.4, patterns are best maintained by people actually using them.
Additional software/services (mysql, cifs, apache, bind, dhcp, cups, whatever) are not included in the selection, those are for the user to chose or add later.
Exactly.
The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything.
This contradicts your previous sentence.
How? I don't have a complete list ready, but I want things like vim, man, strace, tcpdump and bind-utils available.
I consider man totally unnecessary on a server. Simply because I can look up the man pages on any machine on the network, so it is unnecessary to have any documentation on the common server machine. I also have machines in the network with all available Kernels since GM and all corresponding kernel-debuginfo installed. And even though it is highly useful (to load crashdumps and debug them), I would consider it severe bloat to have those many GB of stuff on every machine in the network. The same is true for "man". Given how often I need tcpdump, I install it if necessary. Of course the opinions on that might differ. But it is much easier to install minimal and then do "zypper in `cat mycustomlist.txt`" than it is to remove all that unnecessary stuff you never need, I'd vote for a "minimal" that really is as minimal as possible. -- Stefan Seyfried "Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body!" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2011/10/25 13:56 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:
What sort of size would be acceptable for you? (just wondering, I rarely allocate less than 10G for root).
FWIW, all my test systems disallow as a minimum the following: bootsplash splashy *office* *game* *firewall* *wireless* *blue* *armor* *hplip* To most I allocate 4800M to / and don't set up users, making use or not of separate /home irrelevant. Some I allocate only 4000M or 4400M. / is always EXT3, inode size always 128, and BS always 1024. As long as solver.onlyRequires=true is set and cruft isn't allowed to accumulate by the package management systems, these sizes are more than adequate for running X and web apps. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Felix Miata wrote:
On 2011/10/25 13:56 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:
What sort of size would be acceptable for you? (just wondering, I rarely allocate less than 10G for root).
FWIW, all my test systems disallow as a minimum the following:
bootsplash splashy *office* *game* *firewall* *wireless* *blue* *armor* *hplip*
Except firewall, none of those are in this pattern. I don't use the firewall, and it's quite probably also not used by the typical server, but I think it's a sensible default for the minimal pattern.
To most I allocate 4800M to / and don't set up users, making use or not of separate /home irrelevant. Some I allocate only 4000M or 4400M. / is always EXT3, inode size always 128, and BS always 1024. As long as solver.onlyRequires=true is set and cruft isn't allowed to accumulate by the package management systems, these sizes are more than adequate for running X and web apps.
There is no X in the minimum server selection. :-) I don't know what solver.onlyRequires=true does so I can't judge whether it is a sane default or not. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 11:54, Per Jessen wrote:
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 10:53, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server.
Which means: nothing installed but sshd. Because nobody knows what kind of services you want to serve
Yes, that is pretty much correct. There are some basic services needed by the system itself though (postfix, nscd, acpid, dhcpcd, syslog, cron, ntp etc).
Of course I was a bit exaggerating towards the "embedded" side. However, neither acpid, nscd, dhcpcd, cron or ntp are strictly necessary. They can be installed later.
My objective is more a "sensible base" rather than only what is "strictly necessary", I think the latter is really a different setup.
XEN guests run very fine without acpid :)
:-)
The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
Haha! Tell this to our 7000 VMs. Of course there is sufficient space, but it comes with a hefty price tag.
Okay, a point worth considering. Would a 1Gb root filesystem be too much?
Multiply the 500MB more with the 7000VMs. Look up the price per TB on your favourite storage vendor. Does that answer the question? :-)
2Tb Hitachi Ultrastars are about CHF100/Tb - SAS is much more pricey. Regardless, your price per VM is surely still reasonable even if you need 5Gb. (about CHF1.00 I get).
"minimal" being "minimal" is something I consider valuable.
Probably two different "minimal" patterns would really be more useful:
* minimal server (text mode) * minimal remotely useful server :-)
Yeah, I think we could do with an another pattern for minimal size. Maybe embedded/all-on-chip systems would also benefit from this?
the second one probably better would be "text mode server". Means: basically a pretty complete installation, good vim, aaa_base-extras, maybe even mc, but no graphical desktop and according libs.
The problem is that both pattern need a maintainer. Ludwig is maintaining the "minimal server" pattern and is maintaining it towards "less is better". I'm fine with that.
Which I'm not coz' it makes more work for me :-( although mostly when testing and trying out hardware. For regular stuff, I also customize one installation and then rsync that to new boxes.
If you are bothered enough by it, maybe you could volunteer to maintain the "text mode full server" pattern? As you have experienced with the broken pattern in 11.4, patterns are best maintained by people actually using them.
I was considering that, yes.
The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything.
This contradicts your previous sentence.
How? I don't have a complete list ready, but I want things like vim, man, strace, tcpdump and bind-utils available.
I consider man totally unnecessary on a server. Simply because I can look up the man pages on any machine on the network, so it is unnecessary to have any documentation on the common server machine.
man != documentation. I primarily want 'man' = the utility.
But it is much easier to install minimal and then do "zypper in `cat mycustomlist.txt`" than it is to remove all that unnecessary stuff you never need, I'd vote for a "minimal" that really is as minimal as possible.
Okay, thanks. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, jdd wrote:
Le 25/10/2011 13:56, Ruediger Meier a écrit :
Adding a true "JeOS selection" would be nice too.
I support this, may you could make an entry in openfate?
Thinking over again I guess it's not really possible to create a static truly minimal JeOS selection which would satisfy a large common user base. But generally reviewing packages and their dependencies with "JeOS capability" in mind could be useful to ease users to customize/minimize their installations. I see these most important points: 1. Find large packages and split them if possible. 2. Remove useless dependencies (specially to locales, 32bit, ... ) 3. Make sure "zypper dup" is keeping an installation as minimal as before. 4. Find the worst space consumers at runtime (/var, /tmp) and try to make them more nice. I guess all these points (except 4.) are part of openSUSE conventions already so such feature request would be more likely just a review request. It would be helpful to collect some concrete tasks to be done. For example as a special case for 1. I'd like to have /lib/modules/ customized which consumes about 1/4 of a current server selection. The existing smaller kernel-*-base packages didn't matched my use cases so far AFAIR. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
Probably two different "minimal" patterns would really be more useful:
* minimal server (text mode) * minimal remotely useful server :-)
Yeah, I think we could do with an another pattern for minimal size. Maybe embedded/all-on-chip systems would also benefit from this?
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection. If you really have 7000 VMs where every MB counts then you won't go 7000 times through the installation DVD anyway but maintaining a selfmade package list instead. More important is IMO to keep the next "server selection" similar to the last one to let users have less surprises. As you see opinions about a real minimal system are too different. For example I have always blacklisted *yast* PolicyKit ConsoleKit *cups* *branding* *wireless* *NetworkManager* *audio* all locales, 32bit stuff and a lot more but could not imagine a machine without git, atd, cron, postfix and sshd. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le 25/10/2011 15:12, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
But it is much easier to install minimal and then do "zypper in `cat mycustomlist.txt`" than it is to remove all that unnecessary stuff you never need, I'd vote for a "minimal" that really is as minimal as possible.
well, do people with such config need any "default" install? It's easy (or should be) to select package or patterns by hand, as it's only once (and as said after that dd or rsync). But when you install from dvd on unknown computer (demos, people coming for help in LUGs), you need a very fast installed minimal install. The "server" in the name is misleading. "text" would be better jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
Probably two different "minimal" patterns would really be more useful:
* minimal server (text mode) * minimal remotely useful server :-)
Yeah, I think we could do with an another pattern for minimal size. Maybe embedded/all-on-chip systems would also benefit from this?
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection.
If you really have 7000 VMs where every MB counts then you won't go 7000 times through the installation DVD anyway but maintaining a selfmade package list instead.
Very true. I'm personally not keen on a tiny installation either.
More important is IMO to keep the next "server selection" similar to the last one to let users have less surprises.
Completely agree. I think I did run a diff on the packages selected in 11.3 and in 11.4, and posted that in the bugreport. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 25.10.2011 17:15, Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Yeah, I think we could do with an another pattern for minimal size. Maybe embedded/all-on-chip systems would also benefit from this?
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection.
You don't have to. Nobody forces you to maintain a pattern, but let's not stop the ones who are wanting to do this.
If you really have 7000 VMs where every MB counts then you won't go 7000 times through the installation DVD anyway but maintaining a selfmade package list instead.
Of course we are imaging those VMs and not installing from DVD. Still, having a minimal selection is useful because adding packages that are needed is IMHO easier than removing everything that's unneeded. Somehow those "gold images" have to be created ;-) -- Stefan Seyfried "Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body!" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 17:15, Ruediger Meier wrote:
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection.
You don't have to. Nobody forces you to maintain a pattern, but let's not stop the ones who are wanting to do this.
Don't get me wrong I also vote for small installations. But what's the point of removing such fundamental things like acl just to safe 190K for example happened in 11.4.
Of course we are imaging those VMs and not installing from DVD. Still, having a minimal selection is useful because adding packages that are needed is IMHO easier than removing everything that's unneeded. Somehow those "gold images" have to be created ;-)
Really? I think sometimes it's the other way around. If I know that I don't need zsh than it's easy to remove. If my login shell is zsh since years but suddenly it's not installed anymore then I can't even login to install it (happened in 11.4). cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 17:15, Ruediger Meier wrote:
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection.
You don't have to. Nobody forces you to maintain a pattern, but let's not stop the ones who are wanting to do this.
Don't get me wrong I also vote for small installations. But what's the point of removing such fundamental things like acl just to safe 190K for example happened in 11.4.
Of course we are imaging those VMs and not installing from DVD. Still, having a minimal selection is useful because adding packages that are needed is IMHO easier than removing everything that's unneeded. Somehow those "gold images" have to be created ;-)
Really? I think sometimes it's the other way around. If I know that I don't need zsh than it's easy to remove. If my login shell is zsh since years but suddenly it's not installed anymore then I can't even login to install it (happened in 11.4).
Adding or removing IS easy, but having a small minimum server pattern means reducing it (adding and removing) as much as possible, and preferably limiting it to service-specific (mysql, apache etc) packages only. The basic tools should be in place, obviously with some being superfluous to some and not to others. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (8.1°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10/25/2011 3:05 PM, Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 2011, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 17:15, Ruediger Meier wrote:
Like I've mentioned in my other emails in this thread I would not waste too much time about minimizing the package selection.
You don't have to. Nobody forces you to maintain a pattern, but let's not stop the ones who are wanting to do this.
Don't get me wrong I also vote for small installations. But what's the point of removing such fundamental things like acl just to safe 190K for example happened in 11.4.
Of course we are imaging those VMs and not installing from DVD. Still, having a minimal selection is useful because adding packages that are needed is IMHO easier than removing everything that's unneeded. Somehow those "gold images" have to be created ;-)
Really? I think sometimes it's the other way around. If I know that I don't need zsh than it's easy to remove. If my login shell is zsh since years but suddenly it's not installed anymore then I can't even login to install it (happened in 11.4).
No that's backwards. It's easier, simpler, cleaner, more transparent to add than to remove. This is not my or anyone's opinion. It's a demonstrable simple fact. In this particular case of a package selection in a linux distro, a few examples, When you start with a lot of things, it's up to you to look through it all and figure out what you don't need. That is unreasonable work and error-prone. When a package gets added, it sometimes pulls dependencies with it. When you remove that same package, those dependencies are not usually also removed automatically. On my headless, no X servers, I usually need Image Magick and ghostscript for image manipulation for faxes and scanned documents. If those packages aren't very carefully compiled to exclude their X11 features and their X lib requirements, they will end up pulling in a bunch of X stuff. If I then remove ghostscript and ImageMagick, or replace them by zypper dup with ones from my own repo, none of those X packages are removed unless I know to go remove them. This is amplified countless times by countless interconnections. It is absolutely unreasonable to expect the user to be able to analyze all of those interactions. That would require essentially all of the knowledge and skill required to _build_ the entire distro from scratch. Even if you _have_ that, it's the furthest thing from convenient, and worse, is poor procedural design. Just because you can do a complex thing does not mean it's equally error-prone or error-free to _require_ doing something complex every time, vs carefully figuring it out once and making it into a reusable system, and then only having to hone it after that, not reinvent it at every install. On other distros, things like "apt-get autoremove" attempt to help with this but that is not possible to be 100% reliable or complete, and it isn't. It's merely better than nothing. It's really basic theory and isn't up for debate whether you think it or not. It is more robust and simpler to add complexity than to remove from it, from anything. The clean, reliable, efficient, serves-the-most, way is start with the minimum, and add what you want. -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Adding or removing IS easy, but having a small minimum server pattern means reducing it (adding and removing) as much as possible, and preferably limiting it to service-specific (mysql, apache etc) packages only. The basic tools should be in place, obviously with some being superfluous to some and not to others.
It looks there is some confusion on the meaning of "minimal". The
"minimal pattern" is meant to be such that nothing shall be removed
from it, only added.
What you describe would be more like a "default server" or "basic
server services" or something like that.
Gerald
--
Dr. Gerald Pfeifer
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Adding or removing IS easy, but having a small minimum server pattern means reducing it (adding and removing) as much as possible, and preferably limiting it to service-specific (mysql, apache etc) packages only. The basic tools should be in place, obviously with some being superfluous to some and not to others.
It looks there is some confusion on the meaning of "minimal". The "minimal pattern" is meant to be such that nothing shall be removed from it, only added.
What you describe would be more like a "default server" or "basic server services" or something like that.
The pattern _is_ called "minimum server selection (textmode)". -- Per Jessen, Zürich (8.7°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Sonntag, 30. Oktober 2011 schrieb Per Jessen:
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Per Jessen wrote:
Adding or removing IS easy, but having a small minimum server pattern means reducing it (adding and removing) as much as possible, and preferably limiting it to service-specific (mysql, apache etc) packages only. The basic tools should be in place, obviously with some being superfluous to some and not to others.
It looks there is some confusion on the meaning of "minimal". The "minimal pattern" is meant to be such that nothing shall be removed from it, only added.
What you describe would be more like a "default server" or "basic server services" or something like that.
The pattern _is_ called "minimum server selection (textmode)".
People who want a pure minimal install, shouldn't install with yast to begin with. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 13:56 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:
People who want a pure minimal install, shouldn't install with yast to begin with.
I disagree, Most systems i install minimalistic with an autoyast xml file. And add only what is really needed afterwards. It is rediculous to install a truckload full of unneeded packages, only the remove them afterwards. Sounds like some one who has to travel with the train one stop ahead. But is forced to travel ten stops, and must travel back nine stops. Stupids things like that it a trademark for Ubuntu. hw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Mittwoch, 2. November 2011, 21:33:16 schrieb Hans Witvliet:
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 13:56 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:
People who want a pure minimal install, shouldn't install with yast to begin with.
I disagree, Most systems i install minimalistic with an autoyast xml file. You just confirmed my statement.
Greetings, Stephan -- Sent from openSUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 02 November 2011, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 2. November 2011, 21:33:16 schrieb Hans Witvliet:
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 13:56 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:
People who want a pure minimal install, shouldn't install with yast to begin with.
I disagree, Most systems i install minimalistic with an autoyast xml file.
You just confirmed my statement.
I've never used such autoyast xml file. Does it really work without using yast? cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (11)
-
Brian K. White -
Bruno Friedmann -
Felix Miata -
Gerald Pfeifer -
Hans Witvliet -
jdd -
Per Jessen -
Ruediger Meier -
Rüdiger Meier
-
Stefan Seyfried -
Stephan Kulow