Debian Bug report logs - #696154
cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.

Package: cloud.debian.org; Maintainer for cloud.debian.org is Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>;

Reported by: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>

Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 11:33:01 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, plessy@debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 11:33:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to plessy@debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 11:33:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:34:20 +0100
Package: cloud.debian.org
Severity: wishlist

Hi James and Anders,

the "less" package is lighter than 200 kB and does not pull extra packages
when installed.  Would it be possible to have it by default in the official
Debian AMIs ?

Have a nice day,

-- 
Charles



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:09:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Anders Ingemann <anders@ingemann.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:09:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Anders Ingemann <anders@ingemann.de>
To: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>, 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:04:48 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Most certainly, I have a standard-packages plugin which is supposed to
install the packages one would expect to see in a base install.
This plugin also installs less. I think I should remove vim and emacs from
it though.
You can see the list here:
https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/blob/master/plugins/standard-packages-tasks/add-standard-packages
I also have a ticket on github for this:
https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/issues/19
I'm not sure where the discussion for standard packages should be
continued, should we just keep it in bugs.debian?


Anders



On 17 December 2012 12:34, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:

> Package: cloud.debian.org
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hi James and Anders,
>
> the "less" package is lighter than 200 kB and does not pull extra packages
> when installed.  Would it be possible to have it by default in the official
> Debian AMIs ?
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> --
> Charles
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cloud-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive:
> http://lists.debian.org/20121217113420.15602.5570.reportbug@chouca.igloo
>
>
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:06:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:06:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #15 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>
To: 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 22:03:22 +0800
On 12/17/2012 08:04 PM, Anders Ingemann wrote:
> Most certainly, I have a standard-packages plugin which is supposed to
> install the packages one would expect to see in a base install.
> This plugin also installs less. I think I should remove vim and emacs
> from it though.
> You can see the list
> here: https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/blob/master/plugins/standard-packages-tasks/add-standard-packages
> I also have a ticket on github for
> this: https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/issues/19
> I'm not sure where the discussion for standard packages should be
> continued, should we just keep it in bugs.debian?
>
>
> Anders

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Also, I don't agree that less should be installed just because it's 200K.
That's not an argument. You might as well add my favorite editor, which
is "joe", and which is also only 200K. Why not?!? :)

Please keep the setup to the strict minimum (in no way, "less" is required).

Thomas

>
>
>
> On 17 December 2012 12:34, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org
> <mailto:plessy@debian.org>> wrote:
>
>     Package: cloud.debian.org <http://cloud.debian.org>
>     Severity: wishlist
>
>     Hi James and Anders,
>
>     the "less" package is lighter than 200 kB and does not pull extra
>     packages
>     when installed.  Would it be possible to have it by default in the
>     official
>     Debian AMIs ?
>
>     Have a nice day,
>
>     --
>     Charles
>
>
>     --
>     To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cloud-request@lists.debian.org
>     <mailto:debian-cloud-request@lists.debian.org>
>     with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>     listmaster@lists.debian.org <mailto:listmaster@lists.debian.org>
>     Archive:
>     http://lists.debian.org/20121217113420.15602.5570.reportbug@chouca.igloo
>
>




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:27:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:27:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
To: 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 23:23:14 +0900
Le Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 01:04:48PM +0100, Anders Ingemann a écrit :
> Most certainly, I have a standard-packages plugin which is supposed to
> install the packages one would expect to see in a base install.
> This plugin also installs less. I think I should remove vim and emacs from
> it though.
> You can see the list here:
> https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/blob/master/plugins/standard-packages-tasks/add-standard-packages
> I also have a ticket on github for this:
> https://github.com/andsens/ec2debian-build-ami/issues/19
> I'm not sure where the discussion for standard packages should be
> continued, should we just keep it in bugs.debian?

Hi Anders,

it depends the path we chose.  How about using a metapackage to control the
contents of the machine image ?  In that case, the metapackage could either
come from an ad-hoc source package, or why not taskel ?

To Thomas: less is installed on almost all Debian systems where
popularity-contest is installed, and is used in almost a half of these systems.
So instances used interactively, this is definitely a command that is missing.

But in the long run, we need a solid criterion to decide what is included and
what is not.  Do you or others know about evaluations on the costs caused by
adding extra kilobytes or megabytes to a machine image ?

Cheers,

-- 
Charles



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:48:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:48:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>
To: 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 22:46:27 +0800
On 12/17/2012 10:23 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> To Thomas: less is installed on almost all Debian systems where
> popularity-contest is installed, and is used in almost a half of these systems.

And?

> So instances used interactively, this is definitely a command that is missing.

I don't agree.

> But in the long run, we need a solid criterion to decide what is included and
> what is not.

This was exactly my point, and I had no doubts that you would get it.

> Do you or others know about evaluations on the costs caused by
> adding extra kilobytes or megabytes to a machine image ?

The point isn't to add or remove extra kilobytes, but to ship the
strict minimum. Otherwise, we might as well add:
- GNU screen
- vim
- joe (yes, I like this one...)
- emacs (wooo... a few megabytes!)
- less
- etc.

Why not? These are nice...

So if the criteria is to have the strict minimum, "less" isn't needed.
If it's to have a nice env, then we'll fight and fight over and over
again to decide which should be added (vim vs emacs anyone?).

Thomas




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:33:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:33:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #30 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
To: 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:28:16 +0900
Le Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 03:14:02PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 02:11:52PM -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > How is it a slippery slope if it is driven by data?
> > 
> > Seriously, figure out a way to ask users what they want. popcon isn't
> > going to be all that useful here becuase of the wild diversity of systems
> > that exist in popcon. But you can certainly just ask users to list any
> > optional packages that they'd like to see on images. Or have a subset
> > of popcon just for cloud images.
> 
> Data is always good to have so, sure, let's find out ways to do that.
> But I urge to figure out how to gather data that distinguish the wishes
> that are cloud-specific wrt the others.
> 
> For everything that is not cloud specific, I think we should strive to
> make the corresponding improvements where they belong, i.e. in Debian
> default installation choices. And I'm sure there is room for
> improvements there, because there is always room for improvement :-)
> 
> Here, I think we should be mostly concerned for cloud-specific needs
> and, sure enough, we should add them to the pre-built images we offer.

Hi all,

I think that the Debian defaults should be based on common practice.  In that
sense, I think that we should first work out a package list that suits our
needs, and only after, if we can demonstrate that it is of general interest,
propose that it may be reflected on Debian's standards.

It would be tempting to use package priorities, with "important" representing
the "bare minimum" discussed earlier, and "standard" representing the images
that are ready to use for some simple tasks.  However, this would mean downgrading
the priority of exim4 and raising the priority of openssh.  I do not volunteer to
lead this discussion...

I think that this rules out bothering debian-boot@lists.debian.org until we
have a good record of providing images that are used broadly, except perhaps to
propose a new "tasksel" task (or more if relevant).

We therefore need a good definition of what is minimal, in terms of packages
and in terms of image size.  For instance, on the Amazon cloud, the size of
instances is defined in gigabytes, and our images are currently configured to
use 8 Gb volumes by default.

For the cloud-specific part, the defintion of what is minimal also needs some
arguments, that can for instance justify why we ship systems with ssh by
default and not other packages, as it is equally easy to install them with
user metadata.

Lastly, there are packages like "less", or "psmisc" (/usr/bin/killall), that
have a neglectable footprint in terms of cost and security.  I understand the
argument of slippery slope, but if we consider the 8 Gb images discussed above,
there is enough space to install some of them.  If we all agree that the
contents of the images is not set on stone (that is, we can remove "less" when
it proves to be deleterious to some users), why not satisfying our current
users (including myself), instead of focusing on the leanest solution, that I
think is likely to attract less users.

Cheers,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:03:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Anders Ingemann <anders@ingemann.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:03:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #35 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Anders Ingemann <anders@ingemann.de>
To: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>, 696154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#696154: cloud.debian.org: Please install 'less' by default on official Debian AMIs.
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 20:00:59 +0100
On 27 December 2012 11:28, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:
> Le Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 03:14:02PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 02:11:52PM -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
>> > How is it a slippery slope if it is driven by data?
>> >
>> > Seriously, figure out a way to ask users what they want. popcon isn't
>> > going to be all that useful here becuase of the wild diversity of systems
>> > that exist in popcon. But you can certainly just ask users to list any
>> > optional packages that they'd like to see on images. Or have a subset
>> > of popcon just for cloud images.
>>
>> Data is always good to have so, sure, let's find out ways to do that.
>> But I urge to figure out how to gather data that distinguish the wishes
>> that are cloud-specific wrt the others.
>>
>> For everything that is not cloud specific, I think we should strive to
>> make the corresponding improvements where they belong, i.e. in Debian
>> default installation choices. And I'm sure there is room for
>> improvements there, because there is always room for improvement :-)
>>
>> Here, I think we should be mostly concerned for cloud-specific needs
>> and, sure enough, we should add them to the pre-built images we offer.
>
> Hi all,
>
> I think that the Debian defaults should be based on common practice.  In that
> sense, I think that we should first work out a package list that suits our
> needs, and only after, if we can demonstrate that it is of general interest,
> propose that it may be reflected on Debian's standards.
>
> It would be tempting to use package priorities, with "important" representing
> the "bare minimum" discussed earlier, and "standard" representing the images
> that are ready to use for some simple tasks.  However, this would mean downgrading
> the priority of exim4 and raising the priority of openssh.  I do not volunteer to
> lead this discussion...
>
> I think that this rules out bothering debian-boot@lists.debian.org until we
> have a good record of providing images that are used broadly, except perhaps to
> propose a new "tasksel" task (or more if relevant).
>
> We therefore need a good definition of what is minimal, in terms of packages
> and in terms of image size.  For instance, on the Amazon cloud, the size of
> instances is defined in gigabytes, and our images are currently configured to
> use 8 Gb volumes by default.
>
> For the cloud-specific part, the defintion of what is minimal also needs some
> arguments, that can for instance justify why we ship systems with ssh by
> default and not other packages, as it is equally easy to install them with
> user metadata.
>
> Lastly, there are packages like "less", or "psmisc" (/usr/bin/killall), that
> have a neglectable footprint in terms of cost and security.  I understand the
> argument of slippery slope, but if we consider the 8 Gb images discussed above,
> there is enough space to install some of them.  If we all agree that the
> contents of the images is not set on stone (that is, we can remove "less" when
> it proves to be deleterious to some users), why not satisfying our current
> users (including myself), instead of focusing on the leanest solution, that I
> think is likely to attract less users.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Charles Plessy
> Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cloud-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121227102816.GA12377@falafel.plessy.net
>
Up until this instance the counter arguments had me swayed, but you do
make some good points. I am currently writing my master thesis, so I
do not have the time to participate in any discussions right now, I
will follow the discussions though and happily implement whatever you
guys decide :-)



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#696154; Package cloud.debian.org. (Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Semaj Jones <jonessemaj21.sj@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Cloud Team <debian-cloud@lists.debian.org>. (Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #40 received at 696154@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Semaj Jones <jonessemaj21.sj@gmail.com>
To: 696154@bugs.debian.org
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 14:59:23 -0700
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Mon Apr 21 00:06:45 2014; Machine Name: buxtehude.debian.org

Debian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.