4 ms·

> These packages are not part of RHEL proper and each one has to be researched and an appropriate package found Given that Centos is now owned by Redhat, isn't

> These packages are not part of RHEL proper and each one has to be researched and an appropriate package found Given that Centos is now owned by Redhat, isn't this really just theatre?

bonzini 9y ago
Pretty much, but not in the sense that you mean. CentOS does the right thing in keeping a clean room. However, it's theatre to insist that RHEL as distributed need not self host. (I am on RHEL engineering, and fought unsuccessfully to include some package in RHEL6---unsuccessfully because "customers don't need it"---only to see it included in RHEL7 because some customer requested it...) That said, it's a dozen packages so it's not a huge deal.
- jlgaddis 9y ago
  > ... unsuccessfully because "customers don't need it ..." And yet, as I noticed (yet again) earlier today while working on kickstarts, it is impossible to get rid of some packages that I will never want installed because they are listed as required dependencies when they really should be, at most, "recommends". For example, I'm currently putting together a kickstart file for a minimal "desktop" installation on ThinkPads -- well, as minimal as RHEL will let me, that is (which isn't saying much). There are numerous packages that I absolutely do not want on these systems but that I am stuck with, such as: bluez, cups-{libs,pk-helper}, gnome-bluetooth{,-libs}, gnome-online-accounts, libsmbclient, oddjob-mkhomedir, samba-{client-libs,common}, tigervnc-{license,server-minimal}, and probably some others that I'm forgetting at the moment. A few of these -- the Bluetooth-related ones -- are particularly relevant [0], yet I can't uninstall these packages (or, better yet, avoid installing them in the first place) without rpm/yum insisting on also taking out dozens of other, critical packages (no, "--nodeps" is not an acceptable solution). Yes, I can "hack" my way around it (disabling services/unit files, etc.) but it would be great if one didn't have to do that in the first place. Sorry, this wasn't directed at you personally, but rather Red Hat in general. > ...fought unsuccessfully to include some package in RHEL6 ... On a side note, I'm now curious which package you were referring to. </rant>
  - bonzini 9y ago
    The ACPI assembler if I remember correctly. BTW, an easy way to block Bluetooth is blacklisting the kernel module. RPM only got soft dependencies recently, so maybe you can check whether Fedora uses them for Bluetooth userspace packages and similar.
    - jlgaddis 9y ago
      Yeah, the "bluetooth" module is one of several that I disable ("install bluetooth /bin/true" in /etc/modprobe.d/disabled.conf) but -- from a paranoid security perspective -- I'd much prefer to not have the software installed in the place. I also have BT disabled in the BIOS. Many, many years ago I'd compile my own kernels and leave out all the stuff I didn't want but that's not worth my time nowadays.
jlgaddis 9y ago
It's still extra work that must be done in order to push out a release -- and by a couple of folks, at an already busy time. It's not like they have all of the Red Hat staff assisting them with it. Personally, I'm pretty impressed that they manage to get releases out as quickly as they do (except for, perhaps, the .0 releases; I wish those dropped quicker but I certsinly understand why they take as long as they do).

> These packages are not part of RHEL proper and each one has to be researched and an appropriate package found Given that Centos is now owned by Redhat, isn't this really just theatre?

bonzini 9y ago

Pretty much, but not in the sense that you mean. CentOS does the right thing in keeping a clean room. However, it's theatre to insist that RHEL as distributed need not self host. (I am on RHEL engineering, and fought unsuccessfully to include some package in RHEL6---unsuccessfully because "customers don't need it"---only to see it included in RHEL7 because some customer requested it...) That said, it's a dozen packages so it's not a huge deal.

jlgaddis 9y ago
> ... unsuccessfully because "customers don't need it ..." And yet, as I noticed (yet again) earlier today while working on kickstarts, it is impossible to get rid of some packages that I will never want installed because they are listed as required dependencies when they really should be, at most, "recommends". For example, I'm currently putting together a kickstart file for a minimal "desktop" installation on ThinkPads -- well, as minimal as RHEL will let me, that is (which isn't saying much). There are numerous packages that I absolutely do not want on these systems but that I am stuck with, such as: bluez, cups-{libs,pk-helper}, gnome-bluetooth{,-libs}, gnome-online-accounts, libsmbclient, oddjob-mkhomedir, samba-{client-libs,common}, tigervnc-{license,server-minimal}, and probably some others that I'm forgetting at the moment. A few of these -- the Bluetooth-related ones -- are particularly relevant [0], yet I can't uninstall these packages (or, better yet, avoid installing them in the first place) without rpm/yum insisting on also taking out dozens of other, critical packages (no, "--nodeps" is not an acceptable solution). Yes, I can "hack" my way around it (disabling services/unit files, etc.) but it would be great if one didn't have to do that in the first place. Sorry, this wasn't directed at you personally, but rather Red Hat in general. > ...fought unsuccessfully to include some package in RHEL6 ... On a side note, I'm now curious which package you were referring to. </rant>
- bonzini 9y ago
  The ACPI assembler if I remember correctly. BTW, an easy way to block Bluetooth is blacklisting the kernel module. RPM only got soft dependencies recently, so maybe you can check whether Fedora uses them for Bluetooth userspace packages and similar.
  - jlgaddis 9y ago
    Yeah, the "bluetooth" module is one of several that I disable ("install bluetooth /bin/true" in /etc/modprobe.d/disabled.conf) but -- from a paranoid security perspective -- I'd much prefer to not have the software installed in the place. I also have BT disabled in the BIOS. Many, many years ago I'd compile my own kernels and leave out all the stuff I didn't want but that's not worth my time nowadays.

jlgaddis 9y ago

It's still extra work that must be done in order to push out a release -- and by a couple of folks, at an already busy time. It's not like they have all of the Red Hat staff assisting them with it. Personally, I'm pretty impressed that they manage to get releases out as quickly as they do (except for, perhaps, the .0 releases; I wish those dropped quicker but I certsinly understand why they take as long as they do).