On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Fabrice Bacchella < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > There is a lot of other dependencies to declare other than postfix, MTA > would have been better. > > > I agree, and suggest to open an RFE on ovirt-host (and elsewhere? > didn't check) to change the Requires:. > > > ovirt-host have a lot of dependencies: > Indeed > rpm -q --requires ovirt-host > NetworkManager-config-server > cockpit > cockpit-dashboard > cockpit-machines-ovirt > cockpit-networkmanager > cockpit-ovirt-dashboard > dracut-fips > firewalld > glusterfs-rdma > ipa-client > katello-agent > mailx > net-snmp > net-snmp-utils > ovirt-host-dependencies = 4.2.3-1.el7 > ovirt-hosted-engine-setup > ovirt-provider-ovn-driver > postfix > python-firewall > rng-tools > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > screen > sysstat > tcpdump > vdsm-hook-ethtool-options > vdsm-hook-fcoe > vdsm-hook-openstacknet > vdsm-hook-vfio-mdev > vdsm-hook-vhostmd > vdsm-hook-vmfex-dev > > Many of thee are useless depending of your setup. > Indeed, but there is obviously a trade-off here. If we can solve a bug that affects, say, 30% of the setups, by requiring a package that takes 300KB disk space, and has (hopefully) no security/administrative/etc. implications, I'd say it's worth adding. > rng-tools, for example, but my hardware don't provides any of the needed > random generators. > screen, tcpdump ? I'm quite surprised. > glusterfs-rdma, I'm not doing glusterfs, and I don't have any hardware to > do rdma > > I am pretty certain that each was added with a good reason. Sometimes you can find the reason in the git commit, or in the linked bug. If you disagree about a specific item, after accepting the general reasoning above, feel free to open a bug. If you disagree with the entire reasoning, it means, practically, that you want more than one ovirt-node, perhaps many more, which will require much more work. Would you volunteer to maintain the various flavors? ovirt-node-gluster-postfix, ovirt-node-ovn-postfix, ovirt-node-gluster-ovn-postfix, ovirt-node-postfix, ovirt-node-sendmail, ... While I do not follow closely maintenance of ovirt-host, I was involved in deciding we do want it, and so far think it was a good decision. Before that, we had partial lists of requirements duplicated over ovirt-host-deploy, ovirt-hosted-engine-setup, ovirt-node (and then ovirt-release, which new ovirt-node uses), and always forgot to update some of them when adding/updating stuff. Current state, of having everything in a single (rather large, admittedly) ovirt-host meta-package is much better. -- Didi
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/ oVirt Code of Conduct: https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ List Archives: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/I7OWOYIZROVAY7BYA2WWTEP5OZK7I7FY/
