Lubos,

-devel and mcelog are the packages that do not belong for sure. Packages with GUIs do not make sense either, so very few users of EC2 AMIs have a graphical environment.

This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

The problem as I see is that images are basically using the same comps groups as RHEL. Which means ALL of them. These packages got into it for a reason.


The solution as I see it would be to limit number of comps groups used in appliance images from EVERYTHING to a limited set.

Additional-devel involves many -devel packages. And since you don't want -devel we might consider removing additional-devel group from appliance images (trough kickstart).


Would that work for you?

I believe that this should be discussed with Bill Nottingham as well.

Lubos, in my opinion, using the kickstart file is a good way to limit the packages since removing them from the comps group would affect the release of the non-ami files. Please do that as soon as possible so we can release the 6.5 Beta AMI's.

What *is* the kickstart file in use here? What groups is it pulling in?

All of them Bill. I'm strongly for explicitly setting groups which are going to be pulled in appliance images.

Devel packages appeared in the AMIs for a reason and I think this reason has nothing to do with package groups. There was a change in perl-devel requires set:

1) RHEL6.4
# rpm -q --requires perl-devel
/usr/bin/perl  
perl >= 0:5.002
perl >= 1:5.7.2
perl = 4:5.10.1-131.el6_4
perl(Carp)  
perl(Config)  
perl(DynaLoader)  
perl(Exporter)  
perl(ExtUtils::Constant)  
perl(ExtUtils::Installed)  
perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)  
perl(ExtUtils::ParseXS)  
perl(File::Compare)  
perl(File::Find)  
perl(File::Path)  
perl(File::Spec)  
perl(Getopt::Long)  
perl(Getopt::Std)  
perl(IO::File)  
perl(Text::Wrap)  
perl(constant)  
perl(strict)  
perl(vars)  
perl(warnings)  
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1


2) RHEL6.5
# rpm -q --requires perl-devel
/usr/bin/perl  
db4-devel  
gdbm-devel  
glibc-devel  
perl >= 0:5.002
perl >= 1:5.7.2
perl = 4:5.10.1-136.el6
perl(Carp)  
perl(Config)  
perl(DynaLoader)  
perl(Exporter)  
perl(ExtUtils::Constant)  
perl(ExtUtils::Installed)  
perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)  
perl(ExtUtils::ParseXS)  
perl(File::Compare)  
perl(File::Find)  
perl(File::Path)  
perl(File::Spec)  
perl(Getopt::Long)  
perl(Getopt::Std)  
perl(IO::File)  
perl(Text::Wrap)  
perl(constant)  
perl(strict)  
perl(vars)  
perl(warnings)  
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1

You can see 'db4-devel gdbm-devel glibc-devel' added to the list. glibc-devel also requires kernel-headers so we get what we get.

These dependencies were changed as a result of fixing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=905482

perl-devel removal is also impossible in the image as it triggers cloud-init removal (wasn't the case with RHEL6.4). I've created another bug to track that: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021463

Ok. I'm proposing to solve the perl-devel in Bug#1021463. This means fixing the cause instead of workarounding it. By excluding signle packages from kickstart ...

Can I close this as duplicate of Bug#1021463?

Lubos

I think this bug is not a duplicate of Bug#1021463 as only solving Bug#1021463 won't solve initial issue. Excluding single packages from kickstart won't help as these extra packages are being installed as dependencies (and we can't have unmet dependencies in AMIs).

To my understanding we have 2 separate issues:
1st issue: we had perl-devel in our RHEL6 AMI for ages, but now it has many more dependencies (as a side-effect of fixing Bug#905482). That's where 'kernel-headers', 'glibc-devel' ans others come from.

2nd issue: we could (in theory) opt for removing perl-devel from our AMIs completely but it's not possible atm due to Bug#1021463

So we still need to make a decision. I can see three possible options:
1) We admit all these -devel packages, kernel-headers,.. are part of minimal setup for RHEL6 and do nothing
2) We push to revert Bug#905482 back
3) We push to fix Bug#1021463 and remove perl-devel from our AMIs (by changing kickstart)

1) is currently correct and a way for Snap 5 as we don't have other choice.
2) Nonsense ...

3) Just set proper blocker. Anyway I don't believe Bug#1021463  + this bug will get blocker+ flag for 6.5.

If it's really issue then I have nothing against removing perl-devel from kicktart.

So this bug stays stalled until Bug#1021463  is resolved.

Lubos

Notabug on our side. I don't want to keep this alive, since in best scenario there is no change on rcm-side.

Lubos