2025-02-20 20:00:42 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !startmeeting ELN SIG 20 Feb
2025-02-20 20:00:45 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-02-20 20:00:42 UTC
2025-02-20 20:00:45 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'ELN SIG 20 Feb'
2025-02-20 20:00:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !meetingname eln
2025-02-20 20:00:54 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now eln
2025-02-20 20:00:59 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Init process
2025-02-20 20:02:04 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-20 20:02:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-02-20 20:02:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-02-20 20:02:33 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-02-20 20:03:07 <@davide:cavalca.name> !hi
2025-02-20 20:03:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
2025-02-20 20:03:26 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2025-02-20 20:03:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2025-02-20 20:03:49 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-20 20:03:49 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Troy Dawson (tdawson)
2025-02-20 20:04:20 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Happy thursday, all
2025-02-20 20:04:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> welcome all, looks like we have a nice group today, let's get started
2025-02-20 20:05:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic New business
2025-02-20 20:06:00 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> Conan Kudo you had left a comment about the systemd-sysusers situation (affecting both rawhide and ELN), anything that needs to be discussed?
2025-02-20 20:06:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I suspect we'll come back to this problem when rpm gains tmpfiles integration
2025-02-20 20:06:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> tbh, we probably need to fix this for all the "standalone" tools
2025-02-20 20:08:03 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Has anyone looked to see how big of an issue it is in all of Fedora (not just ELN) ?
2025-02-20 20:08:11 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> in that case, my question would be what value the standalone tools would still provide
2025-02-20 20:08:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> they don't really anymore
2025-02-20 20:08:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> unless you really want a tiny image
2025-02-20 20:08:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because then you don't have libsystemd-shared pulled in
2025-02-20 20:08:57 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ~30K vs ~4M
2025-02-20 20:09:04 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> ouch
2025-02-20 20:09:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> (I'm not actually sure if it's 30K but it's definitely in that range)
2025-02-20 20:10:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> does that include all the deps of systemd-shared?
2025-02-20 20:10:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> not sure
2025-02-20 20:11:29 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> IMO this just exposes the bigger problem we have with unconditional dependencies on host-only services
2025-02-20 20:12:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> libsystemd is getting slimmed down in the future too with more dlopen usage, but there's probably a lot of slimming to do
2025-02-20 20:12:07 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> I've seen it a lot with flatpaks, but other parts of the distro are just as affected
2025-02-20 20:12:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> More dependencies need to be conditional on the kernel being installed I guess 
2025-02-20 20:13:35 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> I look at systemd as being the determining factor, because of init containers
2025-02-20 20:15:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> because either an image will already have systemd to serve as PID 1 (bootable system or init container), or it won't (userspace container, toolbox, flatpak, etc.)
2025-02-20 20:16:46 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> but getting to that point (both in approach and in implementation) will take time
2025-02-20 20:17:40 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> Conan Kudo I guess we'll follow up in the ticket
2025-02-20 20:17:55 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything else on this particular point?
2025-02-20 20:18:00 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the dlopen thing is more of a mask than a real fix
2025-02-20 20:18:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and we still don't have things wired up in rpm to deal with the dlopen metadata systemd makes
2025-02-20 20:18:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but yeah nothing else
2025-02-20 20:19:29 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> any other new business to discuss?
2025-02-20 20:20:47 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> ok, moving along
2025-02-20 20:20:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Old business
2025-02-20 20:21:21 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> before we start going through tickets, anything anyone wants to raise first?
2025-02-20 20:22:24 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Nothing from me.
2025-02-20 20:22:36 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/192
2025-02-20 20:23:17 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything to discuss this week on the desktop background?  there's been some activity in the ticket, and currently the vote is scheduled for next week
2025-02-20 20:23:57 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I didn't do the "ELN on Fedora background" because I agree with you.
2025-02-20 20:24:22 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I guess I should have said that in the ticket.
2025-02-20 20:24:32 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> it's nice to have someone agree with me occasionally (iykyk)
2025-02-20 20:26:30 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info desktop artwork submissions are open for one more week, options will come up for vote next week
2025-02-20 20:26:36 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/206
2025-02-20 20:27:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> doesn't look like there's been any progress on other projects dropping their dnf-4 dependencies
2025-02-20 20:28:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> Conan Kudo was it PackageKit that you were going to look into?
2025-02-20 20:28:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes
2025-02-20 20:29:00 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I can understand some of them giving priority to other things, but I'm a bit surprised about PackageKit and policycoreutils.
2025-02-20 20:30:15 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> I'm hoping that with RHEL 10.0 wrapping up soon, that teams will start to look ahead again
2025-02-20 20:30:54 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep
2025-02-20 20:31:07 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> it might help if the dnf5 documentation were better though
2025-02-20 20:31:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah
2025-02-20 20:31:55 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's been the stumbling block for me
2025-02-20 20:32:33 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> we've had the same problem with porting Content Resolver to dnf5
2025-02-20 20:32:43 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I asked them about it in my last meeting with them, I hope they are able to address it soon
2025-02-20 20:33:39 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> it would be really nice if they could help/guide these particular projects with the porting
2025-02-20 20:34:07 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> maybe they can't do it all themselves, but without the docs it's pretty hard for anyone else to either
2025-02-20 20:34:45 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything else on this ticket?
2025-02-20 20:35:33 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/211
2025-02-20 20:36:03 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> so I find this one particularly interesting, and it also affects Fedora to some extent
2025-02-20 20:36:32 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> the big question here is what sort of images/installations should be readily automatable with ansible?
2025-02-20 20:37:22 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> the ansible dnf* modules require the corresponding python dnf* library (remember that ansible is written in and works with python)
2025-02-20 20:37:25 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I keep finding that ansible is everywhere.
2025-02-20 20:37:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Though, I have to admin, these shouldn't be in minimal containers.
2025-02-20 20:37:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> in the dnf-4 era, anything with dnf would automatically have python3-dnf, because that was the implementation
2025-02-20 20:38:00 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> but not so with dnf5
2025-02-20 20:38:16 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> python3-libdnf5 is a binding, not strictly needed by dnf5 (the CLI)
2025-02-20 20:38:17 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> i guess I will run into this in OpenStack-Ansible at some point
2025-02-20 20:38:37 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> **ponders adding ELN as experimental in CI**
2025-02-20 20:39:06 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> but we build our own images, so not directly comprable
2025-02-20 20:39:56 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> so, whatever we want to be ready as an ansible host (iow a node that is controlled by ansible) will need a deliberate addition of python3-libdnf5
2025-02-20 20:40:21 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> but what should be and what need not be?
2025-02-20 20:41:02 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Just to clarify, cuz I'm a bit confused.  Will ansible not run without python3-libdnf5?   Or is it just some of the plugins?
2025-02-20 20:41:39 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> basically anything that needs to manipulate the system
2025-02-20 20:41:45 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> well, packages, i guess
2025-02-20 20:41:57 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ansible.builtin.dnf, e.g., needs to be able to talk to DNF via python
2025-02-20 20:42:19 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Unless  they are using dnf5 itself, like a real person would.
2025-02-20 20:43:12 <@tdawson:fedora.im> This is just me, but I'm looking at ansible and thinking "well ... do something about it."
2025-02-20 20:43:14 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> right, but the question here is what kind of images/installations do users need to be managed by ansible, and which not?
2025-02-20 20:43:42 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> e.g. what about the base (docker/podman) image?
2025-02-20 20:43:42 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I don't think containers need it
2025-02-20 20:44:21 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> "cloud" instances, maybe? but it also feels like something that should/could just be a Recommends: on ansible
2025-02-20 20:44:25 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> if it isn't already
2025-02-20 20:44:49 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> a host doesn't need ansible-core to be controlled by ansible, it just needs python and certain python modules
2025-02-20 20:46:15 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sorry, but that's the opposite of what I'm thinking.  Ansible has known that dnf5 is c++ based for years.  It's great that we are able to get python out of things so they are trimmed down and fast.  And because they (ansible) aren't doing anything, we have to put extra stuff into the images just because they don't want to do anything.
2025-02-20 20:47:30 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sorry, but it has to be said.
2025-02-20 20:47:45 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/collections/ansible/builtin/dnf5_module.html
2025-02-20 20:47:47 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I've got two tickets asking me to take python out of my images, and then this one asking me to put it in.
2025-02-20 20:48:23 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> That might be true, but let's not forget the conversation that we just had about the DNF5 api and the challenges therein with respect to adoption.
2025-02-20 20:49:15 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> To be clear though, I think it's perfectly reasonable to _not_ ship it in the images, and for those who need it to: 1. install it; or 2. come join the SIG and maintain that image variant for their use cases
2025-02-20 20:50:10 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Ya ... and it seems reasonable for people to want it in.  I wouldn't even have an opinion on this if it weren't for the two tickets I'm working on.
2025-02-20 20:50:27 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> if people could put some input in the ticket, we have different viewpoints here (and that's great!), clearly this a bigger question that will need further discussion probably on higher levels
2025-02-20 20:50:48 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> depending on what kind of images you mean, removing python might be premature
2025-02-20 20:51:10 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> let's remove python _and_ add it to the repo excludes! 😉
2025-02-20 20:51:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'll add something to the ticket, with links to my other tickets.
2025-02-20 20:51:45 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> thanks, and anyone else's views are welcome here too, please chime in
2025-02-20 20:52:09 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> but in the interest of time...
2025-02-20 20:52:17 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Open floor
2025-02-20 20:52:40 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything else to discuss today?
2025-02-20 20:52:51 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Oh, sorry for taking so much time.
2025-02-20 20:53:32 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I want to say that I've started on the Contenter Resolver / Extras stuff.
2025-02-20 20:53:41 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> how's that going?
2025-02-20 20:53:52 <@tdawson:fedora.im> It's going to take a while just because it takes so long to do a run.
2025-02-20 20:54:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> But the code is very well commented, so fairly easy to read.
2025-02-20 20:54:28 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> do none of the in tree tests cover that case?
2025-02-20 20:55:56 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I haven't tried them yet ... I didn't think of them.
2025-02-20 20:57:11 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> it doesn't need to be all of ELN+Extras, you just need a base config (e.g. a  tiny subset of ELN, such as what goes into a base container image) and then an add-on config that has both runtime and build deps which are not in the base config
2025-02-20 20:57:40 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> right now, you'd only get the runtime deps, the goal here is to get the build deps too
2025-02-20 20:58:17 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep, this last run I've taken a large chunck off ... but now that I'm looking at the test configs ... those are much smaller .... that might help speed things up.
2025-02-20 20:59:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Anyway, it's moving along.  It's possible I can have signifigant progress next week.
2025-02-20 20:59:29 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> looking forward to it!
2025-02-20 20:59:37 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> one minute left, anything else?
2025-02-20 21:00:42 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> thanks for running!
2025-02-20 21:01:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> in that case, thank you all for coming today, and for the discussions.  see you elsewhere until next week.
2025-02-20 21:01:05 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !endmeeting