[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] nilfs-utils moving in core

[Heiko Baums]

Am Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:26:00 +0100
schrieb Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de>:

> I second this. If the reason for moving a package to core is that the
> installer cannot handle it otherwise the installer needs to be fixed.

The question is not that the installer can't handle it if it's not in
[core]. The question is that if the installer creates a filesystem on
the harddisk the appropriate tools need to be installed on the system,
too. And this is only possible if those packages are in [core] because
the core iso only contains the [core] repo and not [extra] and
[community]. Also the netinstall iso can only install from [core] as
far as I know. So if AIF supports nilfs or another filesystem, those
tools have to be moved to [core].

> That's why I would vote against moving it to core. I'd even say we
> should have a look at those packages in core with low usage and see if
> we should move them to extra. There are already packages for which we
> don't get any sign-offs which shows that those are no longer needed to
> be in core.

That's definitely not the definition of [core]. [core] is not for
supporting the most used and most popular packages. [core] is for
providing system relevant packages which are necessary to build a
minimal system.

And it's not the dev's task to decide how a user wants to partition and
format his harddisk.

If it's done like you're suggesting than you would force a user to only
format his harddisk with e.g. ext4, because you think that ext4 is the
one and only and most popular filesystem and every other filesystem has
to be moved to [extra], because they are not necessary or not as
popular as ext4.

It's all about choice - the user's, not the dev's choice.

Instead every filesystem - probably except for dosfsutils - has to be
moved to [core] and be supported by AIF, because a filesystem is the
most basic and necessary part of a system which has to be chosen, used
and installed during installation. You simply can't reformat or
repartition a harddisk after the installation. Well, it's possible but
not without having a second harddisk onto which the installed system
had first to be copied. But that's not the way a system should be
installed.

So every filesystem - regardless of how much it is used and how popular
it is - has definitely to be moved to [core] and supported by AIF.

And, no, ext2 is not the only filesystem which can be used for /boot
and /.

But on the other hand every filesystem related package has to be
removed from (base), while AIF should then be able to recognize which
filesystems are created on the harddisk and install the appropriate
filesystem tools automagically.

> The idea of core was to provide a minimal set of packages that are
> needed by nearly all users to set up a base system. Our sign-off
> procedure ensures that we don't put broken packages by accident there.

But filesystems - all of them - belong to the very minimal set of
packages that are needed to set up a base system. But every user needs
a different filesystem for a reason, because every user has different
requirements.

experimental != broken

Just because a filesystem is marked as experimental doesn't mean that
it's broken. Btrfs e.g. is missing a fsck, yet, but it shall be pretty
stable until the harddisk gets too cluttered. At least it's said by
many people in the web. So there are several people who like to use and
to test it.

As soon as there's a first stable version of a package it should of
course not be updated anymore to newer, unstable versions.

Of course, those experimental packages should explicitly be marked as
experimental in AIF.

There have been, btw., several kernel modules in the vanilla kernel
which have been marked as experimental for many years even if they
haven been really stable in the meantime. So the word experimental is
quite relative.

> I don't think that nilfs matches the criteria needed for inclusion in
> core. (side note: it has 1.38% usage according to pkgstats)

Why does it only have 1.38% usage? Just because it's not in [core] and
not supported by AIF, just because a filesystem is usually chose at
install time.

And nilfs won't get as a high usage as ext4, just because it's
primarily meant for using on a SSD (SSD disks, USB sticks, etc.). But
to be able to install Arch Linux on a USB stick with the official
install CD and to format the USB stick with nilfs it needs to be
supported by AIF and to be in [core].

Heiko