[PATCH 1/2] UBUNTU: (packaging) Resolve module dependencies in base package

Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com
Tue Apr 9 18:17:50 UTC 2013


On 04/09/2013 12:04 PM, Scott Moser wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Stefan Bader wrote:
> 
>> It turns out that there are several modules in the base package which
>> have unmet dependencies on modules in the extra package. This change
>> will move the following:
>>
>>   72K drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.ko
>>  612K drivers/infiniband/core/*
>>  104K drivers/scsi/device_handler/*
>>   72K drivers/scsi/osd/*
>>   32K fs/exofs/libore.ko
>>  200K net/ceph/libceph.ko
>> -----
>> 1092K
> 
> Stefan,
>   Thanks for looking at this.
> 
>> The numbers are taken from a 64bit build, so should be worst case. The
>> resulting linux-image package was 7.1M.
> 
> Where did you get 7.1M?
> 
> $ apt-cache show linux-image-3.8.0-17-generic | grep Size
> Installed-Size: 33020
> Size: 12539448
> 
> Not a big deal, if anything it lessens the effect of including these
> dependencies.  As we're proposing to grow a ~33M installed package by ~1M.
> 
> I have 2 thoughts here:
> a.) If we've made due with out these modules in the base image, then
>     perhaps we could take the opposite approach and trim out the broken
>     modules from the base image and *reduce* its size.  That clearly would
>     not cause regression as people were not [successfully] using those
>     modules anyway.
> 

I'm inclined to take this approach, e.g., remove from linux-image all
modules with unsatisfied dependencies (after first fixing ceph).

>     If someone wants these specific modules back in, they can file bugs
>     and request such things.
> 
> b.) We really should have some document or guiding policy on what function
>     gets included in base and what does not.  Otherwise the kernel team is
>     left to my whimsy of "please put module X in -virtual" without any
>     good reasoning or justification for refusal.
> 

Mostly our policy to date has consisted of me dragging my feet and
resisting inclusion requests. The virtual image definition was never
really very well defined.

rtg
-- 
Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com




More information about the kernel-team mailing list