FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:50 PM
Christoph Wickert
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?

* The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
* The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
10 MB.

Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
this?

Regards,
Christoph
[1]
http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/lxde/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
[2]
http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/xfce/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 07:43 AM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

Hi,

Maybe somehow fluid-soundfont-gm or fluid-soundfont-lite-patches is getting
dragged in ? Those are quite big.

Regards,

Hans


On 03/22/2010 01:50 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>
> * The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
> single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
> replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
> doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
> * The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
> changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
> 10 MB.
>
> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
> this?
>
> Regards,
> Christoph
> [1]
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/lxde/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
> [2]
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/xfce/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
>
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 08:32 AM
Christoph Wickert
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

Am Montag, den 22.03.2010, 09:43 +0100 schrieb Hans de Goede:
> Hi,
>
> Maybe somehow fluid-soundfont-gm or fluid-soundfont-lite-patches is getting
> dragged in ?

Nope, according to the logs [1+2] they are not in there. Also it's a
steady growth instead of some big changes.

Regards,
Christoph

[1] http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/xfce/logs/
[2] http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/lxde/logs/

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 09:04 AM
Peter Robinson
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Christoph Wickert
<christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>
> * * ** The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
> * * * *single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
> * * * *replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
> * * * *doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
> * * ** The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
> * * * *changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
> * * * *10 MB.
>
> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
> this?

I've found with Moblin and Sugar that one of the easiest/quickest but
probably not the most eloquent way is to do a 'rpm -qa | sort >
rpm-out' and then using some horrible diff hacking to get a rough idea
of what's changed. I know there's been some expansion of dependencies
with the addition of gstreamer-plugins-bad-free and it looks like some
other deps in some core things have been pulled in as well. I need to
sit down in the next week or two and go through the ones I've noted
mentally and follow up with bugs but my real life seems to keep
getting in the way.

Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 12:13 PM
Seth Vidal
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Peter Robinson wrote:


On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Christoph Wickert
<christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:

Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?

* * ** The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
* * * *single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
* * * *replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
* * * *doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
* * ** The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
* * * *changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
* * * *10 MB.

Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
this?


I've found with Moblin and Sugar that one of the easiest/quickest but
probably not the most eloquent way is to do a 'rpm -qa | sort >
rpm-out' and then using some horrible diff hacking to get a rough idea
of what's changed.



rpm -qa --qf "%{name}
" | sort > rpm-out

then you can diff the two more easily.

-sv
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 12:20 PM
Adam Miller
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Christoph Wickert
<christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>
> * * ** The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
> * * * *single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
> * * * *replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
> * * * *doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
> * * ** The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
> * * * *changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
> * * * *10 MB.
>
> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
> this?
>
> Regards,
> Christoph
> [1]
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/lxde/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
> [2]
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/xfce/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

Could it be related to the dracut issue we ran into during the F12 build cycle?

-AdamM

--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 12:27 PM
Peter Robinson
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Adam Miller
<maxamillion@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Christoph Wickert
> <christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>>
>> * * ** The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
>> * * * *single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
>> * * * *replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
>> * * * *doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
>> * * ** The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
>> * * * *changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
>> * * * *10 MB.
>>
>> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
>> this?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christoph
>> [1]
>> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/lxde/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
>> [2]
>> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/xfce/logs/SIZEHISTORY-i386
>>
>> --
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>
> Could it be related to the dracut issue we ran into during the F12 build cycle?

Possibly. I'm also seeing packages pull in perl again (need to review
and file bugs). anaconda/syslinux is one of the big ones here. It was
always an issue but for some reason syslinux use to have the auto deps
suppressed which stopped the perl dep. perl pulls in a good 40+ meg
for a tiny little script that is used during a small component of the
anaconda process that isn't used at all as part of the liveinst (or
even a traditional install). See bug 544136 and its dependant bug.

Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 12:56 PM
Adam Jackson
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 01:50 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>
> * The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
> single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
> replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
> doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
> * The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
> changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
> 10 MB.
>
> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
> this?

Download the ISOs, boot them in qemu, rpm -qa inside them...

Shame that the compose logs only go back to February though.

- ajax
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 04:04 PM
Stephen John Smoogen
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Seth Vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Christoph Wickert
>> <christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why has Fedora become so fat in the F13 development cycle?
>>>
>>> * * ** The LXDE Spin has grown from 464 MB to 509 MB [1] without a
>>> * * * *single change in the Spin. There actually was a change, SLIM was
>>> * * * *replaced with LXDM, but LXDM is actually smaller because it
>>> * * * *doesn't require the desktop-brackgrounds package
>>> * * ** The Xfce spin has grown from 697 MB to 744 MB [2] without major
>>> * * * *changes. In fact, we dropped totem and gftp, which is at least
>>> * * * *10 MB.
>>>
>>> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
>>> this?
>>
>> I've found with Moblin and Sugar that one of the easiest/quickest but
>> probably not the most eloquent way is to do a 'rpm -qa | sort >
>> rpm-out' and then using some horrible diff hacking to get a rough idea
>> of what's changed.
>
>
> rpm -qa --qf "%{name}
" | sort > rpm-out
>
> then you can diff the two more easily.
>

I also like to do a

rpm -qa --qf '%{SIZE} %{NAME}
" | sort -n > rpm-size-out

and one could do a

rpm -qa --qf '%{NAME} %{SIZE}
' | sort > rpm-size

and compare per package to see what has grown. Also are there extra
debugging being turned on for the alpha/betas? I know that a long time
ago (back when your pappy and I fought in the great Distro war) we
turned on extra stuff during alpha/betas to help find problems.


--
Stephen J Smoogen.

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for?
-- Robert Browning
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-22-2010, 06:22 PM
Christoph Wickert
 
Default Fedora has become fat!

Am Montag, den 22.03.2010, 09:13 -0400 schrieb Seth Vidal:
>
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote
>
> >> Any ideas what made Fedora become so fat or how to further investigate
> >> this?
> >
> > I've found with Moblin and Sugar that one of the easiest/quickest but
> > probably not the most eloquent way is to do a 'rpm -qa | sort >
> > rpm-out' and then using some horrible diff hacking to get a rough idea
> > of what's changed.
>
>
> rpm -qa --qf "%{name}
" | sort > rpm-out
>
> then you can diff the two more easily.

I know how to use rpm, but as long as I don't have all the nightlies
there is not much to compare. All I can compare is the F12 spin with the
latest nightly and this wont tell me much about what happened in the
meantime.

Is there an easy way to get previous versions of a package if I have
full n-v-r, say from koji?

> -sv

Regards,
Christoph

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:11 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org