From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81B32C04AB6 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461C026A80 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="YgbedsZq" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726546AbfEaPoG (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2019 11:44:06 -0400 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:38016 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726518AbfEaPoG (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2019 11:44:06 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4VFYFpv165229; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:43:33 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=icO+AdpyViaYYmcr8t35qWYiSITxensnQBW5adiYkm4=; b=YgbedsZqkrHsK4MerE7P5H5GnQ1wyjjcaHkqF6P2eHflPXSeEmOofKD6uBpH/BBuOLEc upt98oSUGlNoPdwrrd2g3Vx6BSY3vBRfRuyQqJI4KnMbGvrGamuINufD2rIOYvpKA/qi Cei6VAXPNmJTK7JChusODh8Y6JnZsXLsW3wV79HVwtboZXRZ+k/5oYQS0jMxdFTMM0ff bcdi6wEqqjzVjnq2FsEYYwhaS+3604vDiI5E+oVzRTCUxGORGPSdMv0t9Vu87YGtop6j FLsUuLjDanGktVryxUA78TZO0AWjWdZu6IFa6dN1BSYsN+B6pORLnIV7oVql6bFBhMz8 Sw== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2spw4ty6h7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 31 May 2019 15:43:33 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4VFhWQi073255; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:43:33 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2ss1fpq7s4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 31 May 2019 15:43:33 +0000 Received: from abhmp0012.oracle.com (abhmp0012.oracle.com [141.146.116.18]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x4VFhVmX014984; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:43:31 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 31 May 2019 08:43:31 -0700 Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 08:43:30 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Jan Kara Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , Lukas Czerner , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara Subject: Re: How to package e2scrub Message-ID: <20190531154330.GA5378@magnolia> References: <20190529120603.xuet53xgs6ahfvpl@work> <20190529235948.GB3671@mit.edu> <20190530095907.GA29237@quack2.suse.cz> <20190530135155.GD2751@mit.edu> <20190531100713.GA14773@quack2.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190531100713.GA14773@quack2.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9273 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905310098 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9273 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905310097 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 12:07:13PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 30-05-19 09:51:55, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:59:07AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > Yeah, my plan is to just not package cron bits at all since openSUSE / SLES > > > support only systemd init anyway these days (and in fact our distro people > > > want to deprecate cron in favor of systemd). I guess I'll split off the > > > scrub bits into a separate sub-package (likely e2fsprogs will suggest > > > installation of this sub-package) and the service will be disabled by > > > default. > > > > I'm not super-fond of extra sub-packages for their own sake, and the > > extra e2scrub bits are small enough (about 32k?) that I don't believe > > it justifies an extra sub-package; but that's a distribution-level > > packaging decision, so it's certainly fine if we're not completely aligned. > > Yes, size is not a big concern but the scrub bits require util-linux, lvm, > and mailer to work correctly and I don't want to add these dependencies to > stock e2fsprogs package because some minimal installations do not want e.g. > lvm at all. Granted these are just scripts so I could get away with not > requiring e.g. lvm at all but it seems user-unfriendly to leave it up to > user to determine that his systemd-service fails due to missing packages. All good reasons for a separate package, particularly considering that on the RH side they've split out xfs_scrub because of its python 3 dependencies. > > Out of curiosity, were any of the complaints that you've heard gone > > beyond people who ran into the various e2scrub/e2scrub_all bugs? I'm > > curious what their concerns were. > > I didn't hear any complaints so far. But I have my doubts anyone actually > run that code so far - openSUSE Tumbleweed has limited userbase, we do > installs to btrfs by default, we don't propose LVM by default, and I didn't > enable the service files to run by default. (I suspect it's only Debian Unstable users who are running it right now...) --D > > Honza > -- > Jan Kara > SUSE Labs, CR