On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 12:07 PM Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de> wrote: [...] > Can we maybe reduce the default set of packages a bit? In particular > the following ones I really don't think should be in our default > install:
Although somewhat orthogonal to your notes below, overall there's a lot of package-entangling in the basic platform underlying the Workstation as well. This is something we should look at if we're to make progress in CI and Lifecycle objectives -- i.e. being able to produce basic platform for integration more quickly. I was talking to contyk about this the other day and we are starting to throw some ideas around about that. Again, doesn't solve all your individual concerns below but at least related. A good portion of the other subthread is really about choices made and how we enable bits properly for something like Workstation, which is also valid but a different effort I think. [...] > 3. atd? Do we still need that? Do we have postinst scripts that need > this? If so, wouldn't systemd-run be a better approach for those? > Isn't it time to make this an RPM people install if they want it? Interestingly I think Google Chrome needs this when it installs, though it seems nonsensical to me. (Chrome is installed by about 50% of our users given some informal stats, so writing it off would be shooting ourselves in the foot.) That's something the Workstation folks may want to work with them to fix in a more systemd-ish way. -- Paul _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
