On Saturday 20 September 2008, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> > If you maintain an application which makes sense for a user to select
> > during installation, [...] make sure that your package is listed in a
> > reasonable group in the comps-fn.xml.in files.
>
> I consider the "during installation" part not much helpful

Not sure if you're referring to the addition of those two words, but I added
them today - if I'm missing something and they make the document less
correct, the change should be reverted.

But I thought it'd be better that way than just "If you maintain an
application which makes sense for a user to select, ..." (select when? ever?)

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
> PackageKit does use it via the yum backend.
>
> http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

Note that this is only from 0.3.3 on. The 0.2.x version currently in Fedora 9
(and the 0.1.x version in F9 GA) just hardcode the categories, which is IMHO a
bug (or "missing feature" if you prefer) in PackageKit, so I'm glad this got
fixed now. For example, the hardcoded category for KDE was missing some of the
stuff we list for KDE in comps, and some categories were missing entirely (e.g.
KDE Software Development).

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 20.09.2008 21:13, Ville Skyttä wrote:

On Saturday 20 September 2008, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:


If you maintain an application which makes sense for a user to select
during installation, [...] make sure that your package is listed in a
reasonable group in the comps-fn.xml.in files.

I consider the "during installation" part not much helpful
Not sure if you're referring to the addition of those two words, but I added
them today -


I don't have a any problems with the addition of those two words (but
I'm not sure if they really improve the situation); the change OTOH was
one more reason for me to actually write the mail that started this
thread ;-)


if I'm missing something and they make the document less
correct, the change should be reverted.


No pressing need to; what we afaics need is this

1. take a closer look at how the data from comps.xml is used in anaconda
and PackageKit or other software
2. based on those information create more clear guidelines (or even a
policy) what packages should be in comps (and where and how)
3. implement that guideline/policy; that normally will be a job that is
best done by the package maintainers; but I suppose more than just a few
will likely ignore that work, thus depending on how important comps.xml
is (which depends on "1") someone maybe should sit down and add all
those that are not in yet but should;


> [...]

CU
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 20.09.2008 22:00, Kevin Kofler wrote:

Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:

PackageKit does use it via the yum backend.


One more reason for us then to make sure everything a user might want to
select is in comps.xml, isn't it?



http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

Note that this is only from 0.3.3 on.


/me looks at rawhide and finds 0.3.2

/me grabs 0.3.3 straight from koji

/me fails to get it to work on F9 (likely my faul) :-/

Hmm. From the screenshot it's hard to see if gpk-application exports the
package groups from comps.xml similar to how pirut/anaconda do. But
seems to be different, which would be a important detail for the
decision how to maintain the comps.xml in Fedora...


> [...]

Cu
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 21.09.2008 14:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 20.09.2008 22:00, Kevin Kofler wrote:

Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:

PackageKit does use it via the yum backend.
One more reason for us then to make sure everything a user might want to
select is in comps.xml, isn't it?



http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

Note that this is only from 0.3.3 on.


/me looks at rawhide and finds 0.3.2

/me grabs 0.3.3 straight from koji

/me fails to get it to work on F9 (likely my fault) :-/


Updating yum as well did the trick.

Hmm. From the screenshot it's hard to see if gpk-application exports the
package groups from comps.xml similar to how pirut/anaconda do. But
seems to be different, which would be a important detail for the
decision how to maintain the comps.xml in Fedora...


Seems to be way different. In pirut/anaconda you in F9 for example can
select the group "GNOME Desktop Environment"; then you can hit the
"details" button and select some more packages from the gnome group or
deselect some other you don't want. Seems that's not possible in
gpk-application right now. Not sure if it should, but that's quite and
important detail when if comes to the "how to maintain comps.xml
properly" question.


CU
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Saturday 20 September 2008 01:36:25 pm Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I recently created comps.xml files for RPM Fusion. During that a few
> things around comps.xml got discussed on the RPM Fusion lists(¹).
>
> That and a recent change (²) to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml
> made me wonder:
>
>
> How important is comps.xml to us these days?
>
>
> (Note that I mean Fedora and RPM Fusion with "us" here, as RPM Fusion
> for things like this just follows the Fedora guidelines)
>
> Comps.xml is afaics mainly used in anaconda (and thus indirectly in
> tools like pungi that rely on anaconda) and yum (if you know what to do)
> these days; PackageKit afaics doesn't use it much (or does it use
> comps.xml at all? Will that change?); it just lists everything it finds
> afaics (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not using PackageKit much and just
> use yum directly).
comps.xml is used by yum when doing group functions also so "yum
groupinstall xfce-desktop" gets that group info from the comps file. its
still pretty vital. and to get the highest visability to your package you
should be entering it.

Dennis

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 21.09.2008 14:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 20.09.2008 22:00, Kevin Kofler wrote:

Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:

PackageKit does use it via the yum backend.
One more reason for us then to make sure everything a user might want
to select is in comps.xml, isn't it?



http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

Note that this is only from 0.3.3 on.


/me looks at rawhide and finds 0.3.2

/me grabs 0.3.3 straight from koji

/me fails to get it to work on F9 (likely my fault) :-/


Updating yum as well did the trick.

Hmm. From the screenshot it's hard to see if gpk-application exports
the package groups from comps.xml similar to how pirut/anaconda do.
But seems to be different, which would be a important detail for the
decision how to maintain the comps.xml in Fedora...


Seems to be way different. In pirut/anaconda you in F9 for example can
select the group "GNOME Desktop Environment"; then you can hit the
"details" button and select some more packages from the gnome group or
deselect some other you don't want. Seems that's not possible in
gpk-application right now. Not sure if it should, but that's quite and
important detail when if comes to the "how to maintain comps.xml
properly" question.


CU
knurd



The groups in comps.xml is used as meta-packages, there can be installed
and removed. just like yum groupinstall/groupremove.

Ex. you can install KDE by installing the kde-desktop meta-package.
All the meta-packages (comps groups) are located under collections.
The categories is not used in pk-application.

Tim

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 21.09.2008 18:36, Dennis Gilmore wrote:

On Saturday 20 September 2008 01:36:25 pm Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

I recently created comps.xml files for RPM Fusion. During that a few
things around comps.xml got discussed on the RPM Fusion lists(¹).
That and a recent change (²) to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml
made me wonder:

>>

How important is comps.xml to us these days?

(Note that I mean Fedora and RPM Fusion with "us" here, as RPM Fusion
for things like this just follows the Fedora guidelines)

Comps.xml is afaics mainly used in anaconda (and thus indirectly in
tools like pungi that rely on anaconda) and yum (if you know what to do)
these days; PackageKit afaics doesn't use it much (or does it use
comps.xml at all? Will that change?); it just lists everything it finds
afaics (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not using PackageKit much and just
use yum directly).


Seems you didn't get what I was up to. Sorry, my fault. Let me try again.

comps.xml is used by yum when doing group functions also so "yum
groupinstall xfce-desktop" gets that group info from the comps file.


Sure.

its still pretty vital.


Sure. But it afaics could be a whole lot more "vital" if all packagers
would use it and would use it in the same way.


and to get the highest visability to your package you
should be entering it.


Sure. But if you read my mail up to the end you will notice that a good
bunch of packagers don't care and don't add their packages to comps. I
want to know if we in Fedora (the project/the distribution) should work
towards fixing that. That implies a proper policy (which is not really
clear right now), fixing the current mess where round about one/third of
our packages (or even more; depends on the way you count) are missing in
comps.xml and making sure all apps present the data from comps in a
similar way.


Cu
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 21.09.2008 19:05, Tim Lauridsen wrote:

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 21.09.2008 14:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 20.09.2008 22:00, Kevin Kofler wrote:

Rahul Sundaram <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:

PackageKit does use it via the yum backend.
One more reason for us then to make sure everything a user might want
to select is in comps.xml, isn't it?

http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/09/19/packagekit-collections/

Note that this is only from 0.3.3 on.

/me looks at rawhide and finds 0.3.2
/me grabs 0.3.3 straight from koji
/me fails to get it to work on F9 (likely my fault) :-/

Updating yum as well did the trick.

Hmm. From the screenshot it's hard to see if gpk-application exports
the package groups from comps.xml similar to how pirut/anaconda do.
But seems to be different, which would be a important detail for the
decision how to maintain the comps.xml in Fedora...
Seems to be way different. In pirut/anaconda you in F9 for example can
select the group "GNOME Desktop Environment"; then you can hit the
"details" button and select some more packages from the gnome group or
deselect some other you don't want. Seems that's not possible in
gpk-application right now. Not sure if it should, but that's quite and
important detail when if comes to the "how to maintain comps.xml
properly" question.
The groups in comps.xml is used as meta-packages, there can be installed
and removed. just like yum groupinstall/groupremove.


Yeah, but that will only install (or remove?) packages that are
'<packagereq type="default">' in the comps file, correct?



Ex. you can install KDE by installing the kde-desktop meta-package.
All the meta-packages (comps groups) are located under collections.
The categories is not used in pk-application.


IOW: adding packages to a group in comps.xml as '<packagereq
type="optional">' is only worth the trouble if you want to make the
package selectable in anaconda, as that information is not used by
pk-application. Correct?


CU
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

James Antill wrote:

On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 19:05 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:

The groups in comps.xml is used as meta-packages, there can be installed
and removed. just like yum groupinstall/groupremove.


But that's not how groupinstall/groupremove works! Groups are _very_
different from meta-packages, for instance:

yum shell <<EOL
install @x-software-development
remove libXaw-devel
run
EOL



in the pk yum backend a "meta package" the same as a yum group.

InstallPackages('x-software-development;meta;meta;meta')

will do the same as 'yum install @x-software-development"

but on other package managers it can be something else.


But then 0.3.2 is still doing utterly broken direct SQL calls, and
failing *sigh*.


it is fixed in 0.3.3

Tim


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list