[master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[Rebecca Chang]

From: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>

Enable lzma compression support in rpm.

[YOCTO #9246]

Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Chang Rebecca Swee Fun <rebecca.swee.fun.chang@intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.16.bb | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.16.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.16.bb
index 5fea53f..44ccc70 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.16.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.16.bb
@@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ RPM_SELF_SIGN_ALGO ?= "DSA"
 
 # Note: perl and sqlite w/o db specified does not currently work.
 #       tcl, augeas, nss, gcrypt, xar and keyutils support is untested.
-PACKAGECONFIG ??= "db bzip2 zlib popt openssl libelf python"
+PACKAGECONFIG ??= "db bzip2 zlib popt openssl libelf python xz"
 
 # Note: switching to internal popt may not work, as it will generate
 # a shared library which will intentionally not be packaged.
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 15:15 +0800, Rebecca Chang wrote:
> From: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>
> 
> Enable lzma compression support in rpm.

Your commit message says what the patch does but not why? Presumably
this change increases the size of the rpm install so what is the
benefit?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun]

We are having issues on decompressing tarball with xz format and rpm installation on target.
We have this solution implemented to resolve it internally and would like to enable it in OE-core in order we wouldn't revisit this issue in future.
Do I need to resend the patch with revised commit message?

Regards,
Rebecca

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org] 
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 4:14 PM
To: Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun <rebecca.swee.fun.chang@intel.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 15:15 +0800, Rebecca Chang wrote:
> From: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>
> 
> Enable lzma compression support in rpm.

Your commit message says what the patch does but not why? Presumably this change increases the size of the rpm install so what is the benefit?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[Mark Hatle]

On 3/14/16 1:18 AM, Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun wrote:
> We are having issues on decompressing tarball with xz format and rpm installation on target.
> We have this solution implemented to resolve it internally and would like to enable it in OE-core in order we wouldn't revisit this issue in future.
> Do I need to resend the patch with revised commit message?

When the packages are produced by the build environment then no issues should be
occurring.

The only time you should be having problems is if you are trying to install
packages (source or binary) produced from outside the build environment.  In the
source case, you can use the workaround of rpm2cpio <whatever> | cpio -id to
extract it.  Then when you build it fresh it will use the standard format.
(Yes, bz2/zlib is less efficient -- but is also more standard.)

If you require the xz/lzma compression, you should be doing this in your own
project's configuration.  I don't think it makes sense to add xz to all RPM
based filesystems.

(If you can profile what adding the xz option does to a filesystem, I may change
my mind.  The profiling needs to include the size change to RPM program itself,
the produced filesystem (as it now has additional dependencies), and the package
feeds size.

My guess, is:  RPM binary will increase in size marginally..  including XZ and
associated items could be potentially 'large'.. and the size of the package
feeds will be reduced, but I don't have a good feeling as to how much.

--Mark

> Regards,
> Rebecca
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org] 
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 4:14 PM
> To: Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun <rebecca.swee.fun.chang@intel.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression
> 
> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 15:15 +0800, Rebecca Chang wrote:
>> From: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>
>>
>> Enable lzma compression support in rpm.
> 
> Your commit message says what the patch does but not why? Presumably this change increases the size of the rpm install so what is the benefit?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
> 

Re: [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression

[Mark Hatle]

On 3/17/16 8:56 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 3/14/16 1:18 AM, Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun wrote:
>> We are having issues on decompressing tarball with xz format and rpm installation on target.
>> We have this solution implemented to resolve it internally and would like to enable it in OE-core in order we wouldn't revisit this issue in future.
>> Do I need to resend the patch with revised commit message?
> 
> When the packages are produced by the build environment then no issues should be
> occurring.
> 
> The only time you should be having problems is if you are trying to install
> packages (source or binary) produced from outside the build environment.  In the
> source case, you can use the workaround of rpm2cpio <whatever> | cpio -id to
> extract it.  Then when you build it fresh it will use the standard format.
> (Yes, bz2/zlib is less efficient -- but is also more standard.)
> 
> If you require the xz/lzma compression, you should be doing this in your own
> project's configuration.  I don't think it makes sense to add xz to all RPM
> based filesystems.
> 
> (If you can profile what adding the xz option does to a filesystem, I may change
> my mind.  The profiling needs to include the size change to RPM program itself,
> the produced filesystem (as it now has additional dependencies), and the package
> feeds size.
> 
> My guess, is:  RPM binary will increase in size marginally..  including XZ and
> associated items could be potentially 'large'.. and the size of the package
> feeds will be reduced, but I don't have a good feeling as to how much.

Sorry, I forgot, the feed won't change without a change to the macros file.

In order to switch to using XZ by default, the 'macros' file for the rpmbuild
process will need to be updated as well:

#       Compression type and level for source/binary package payloads.
#               "w9.gzdio"      gzip level 9 (default).
#               "w9.bzdio"      bzip2 level 9.
#               "w6.lzdio"      lzma level 6 (legacy, stable).
#               "w6.xzdio"      xz level 6 (obsoletes lzma, unstable).
#
#%_source_payload       w9.gzdio
#%_binary_payload       w9.gzdio

Ignore the stable or not comments above, I don't believe they are relevant
anymore.  But the key is you want to swap out gzdio with xzdio or lzdio.  (It
should remain as w9.)

This goes to my previous comment about profiling -- if we consider a switch
here, changing that is the only way the produced package feed will shrink in
size.. (I'd forgotten about that originally.)

> --Mark
> 
>> Regards,
>> Rebecca
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org] 
>> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 4:14 PM
>> To: Chang, Rebecca Swee Fun <rebecca.swee.fun.chang@intel.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [master][PATCH] rpm: enable xz/lzma compression
>>
>> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 15:15 +0800, Rebecca Chang wrote:
>>> From: Anuj Mittal <anujx.mittal@intel.com>
>>>
>>> Enable lzma compression support in rpm.
>>
>> Your commit message says what the patch does but not why? Presumably this change increases the size of the rpm install so what is the benefit?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>