From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "arch" <arch(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 12:26:56 PM Subject: Re: [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup On 07/28/2013 09:46 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > Hello All, > > I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state > presented to use by Fedora. > > Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to > deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). > > I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard > commonly used utility was removed. > > There are two alternatives : > > 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install > tar utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Drawback: require tar at destination machine. > > 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. > > Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. > Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. > Drawback: complexity within our code. > > [[[ > There was 3rd alternative, using python tar module to deploy tar. > However, there is a bug in that module when processing last block if empty. > This is edge condition but happened to at least one of the users and I > could > reproduce it. > ]]] > > Regards, > Alon Bar-Lev Consider using cpio instead of tar. It is required to build initrd, so available in any installation. It is also supported by the library currently used in the engine to build the tar archive.

From: alonbl(a)redhat.com, at(a)redhat.com, "Alon Bar-Lev" <redhat.com(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:15:33 AM Subject: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup

for some reason fedora-18/19 got tar out of base system, so we are forced to find some solution, although manual configuration is required anyway (repository, networking etc...). there was attempt to use python tar module, however this module has a bug when last block is empty, so it is not suitable for usage. cpio is alternative for fedora, however it is rightfully missing from other distributions as it is much less used. as we do not support hosts using different distributions, we are ok now. in future, we can use python self extract script, work already performed at: I1e5ddab9ae87979da7d7296c4f3c7ef08e21e903 at the price of complexity. Change-Id: I1386e7d688a9ec7e28519fb407478fd17cbab4ca Signed-off-by: Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl at redhat.com> [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/

Hi all, ----- Original Message ----- > From: alonbl(a)redhat.com, at(a)redhat.com, "Alon Bar-Lev" <redhat.com(a)redhat.com&gt; > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:15:33 AM > Subject: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup > [snip] > > for some reason fedora-18/19 got tar out of base system, so we are > forced to find some solution, although manual configuration is required > anyway (repository, networking etc...). > > there was attempt to use python tar module, however this module has a > bug when last block is empty, so it is not suitable for usage. > > cpio is alternative for fedora, however it is rightfully missing from > other distributions as it is much less used. as we do not support hosts > using different distributions, we are ok now. > > in future, we can use python self extract script, work already performed > at: I1e5ddab9ae87979da7d7296c4f3c7ef08e21e903 at the price of > complexity. > > Change-Id: I1386e7d688a9ec7e28519fb407478fd17cbab4ca > Signed-off-by: Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl at redhat.com> > > [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ > FWIW: I personally find it least ugly to choose neither cpio nor pyar, and require installing tar. Besides Ohad's case in the bug, do we know about real problems? Is there a specific requirement to be able to run a node on a minimal installation of $distro? Some other real complications this might cause? Anyway, if we do have to choose, I'd go with pyar and not cpio. cpio is used by rpm and initramfs, but other than that it's not very common (? IMHO), and if we go with it we might face ourselves in the same situation at some later point in time - that cpio will not be included in a minimal installation of $distro. Best regards,

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 9:25:13 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup > > On 07/30/2013 03:07 PM, Yedidyah Bar David wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: alonbl(a)redhat.com, at(a)redhat.com, "Alon Bar-Lev" >>> <redhat.com(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:15:33 AM >>> Subject: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 >>> misses tar at minimal setup >>> >> [snip] >>> >>> for some reason fedora-18/19 got tar out of base system, so we are >>> forced to find some solution, although manual configuration is required >>> anyway (repository, networking etc...). >>> >>> there was attempt to use python tar module, however this module has a >>> bug when last block is empty, so it is not suitable for usage. >>> >>> cpio is alternative for fedora, however it is rightfully missing from >>> other distributions as it is much less used. as we do not support hosts >>> using different distributions, we are ok now. >>> >>> in future, we can use python self extract script, work already performed >>> at: I1e5ddab9ae87979da7d7296c4f3c7ef08e21e903 at the price of >>> complexity. >>> >>> Change-Id: I1386e7d688a9ec7e28519fb407478fd17cbab4ca >>> Signed-off-by: Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl at redhat.com> >>> >>> [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ >>> >> >> FWIW: >> >> I personally find it least ugly to choose neither cpio nor pyar, and >> require installing tar. >> >> Besides Ohad's case in the bug, do we know about real problems? >> Is there a specific requirement to be able to run a node on a minimal >> installation of $distro? Some other real complications this might cause? >> >> Anyway, if we do have to choose, I'd go with pyar and not cpio. cpio is >> used by rpm and initramfs, but other than that it's not very common (? >> IMHO), >> and if we go with it we might face ourselves in the same situation at some >> later point in time - that cpio will not be included in a minimal >> installation >> of $distro. >> >> Best regards, >> > > As far as I know most distributions use initramfs to boot, and that > requires the cpio command to build it, so all machines running Fedora, > RHEL, CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu and Gentoo (if using genkernel) should have > cpio installed even for minimal installations. Hi, Binary based distributions do not build initramfs on the fly, right? Require cpio to build initramfs is like require gcc to build kernel, no?

RHEL, CentOS does have tar at minimal as far as I know... Gentoo does not have genkernel/cpio in stage3 (minimal).

All but Fedora have tar at minimal. Regards, Alon

Hello All, Starting the discussion again... I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state presented to use by Fedora. Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard commonly used utility was removed.

There are three alternatives : 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install tar utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. Benefit: simplicity. Benefit: use standard tools. Benefit: lower payload to transmit. Drawback: require tar at destination machine. 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. Drawback: complexity within our code. 3. Do not use tar but cpio, a patch is ready[2]. Benefit: simplicity. Benefit: use standard tools. Benefit: lower payload to transmit. Benefit: ability to use Fedora-19 minimal. Drawback: cpio is even less common than tar, even if it exists in Fedora-19 it can be removed without anyone notice. Drawback: most other distributions will not have cpio in their minimal installation. [[[ There was 4rd alternative, using python tar module to deploy tar. However, there is a bug in that module when processing last block if empty. This is edge condition but happened to at least one of the users and I could reproduce it. ]]] What option do you prefer? Regards, Alon Bar-Lev [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17295/ [2] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel

I would advocate for option 2. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michal Skrivanek" <michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt;, "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "arch" <arch(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "users" > <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 3:25:24 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup > > > On Jul 30, 2013, at 15:12 , Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > Starting the discussion again... > > > > I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state > > presented to use by Fedora. > > > > Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to > > deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). > > > > I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard > > commonly used utility was removed. > > How about filing bug on that? This is such a basic utility I can't imagine > anyone removing it. > > > > > There are three alternatives : > > > > 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install > > tar utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. > > > > Benefit: simplicity. > > Benefit: use standard tools. > > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > > Drawback: require tar at destination machine. > > > > 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. > > > > Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. > > Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. > > Drawback: complexity within our code.

On Jul 30, 2013, at 15:12 , Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hello All, > > Starting the discussion again... > > I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state presented to use by Fedora. > > Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). > > I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard commonly used utility was removed. How about filing bug on that? This is such a basic utility I can't imagine anyone removing it. +1 it would make the most proper solution from all. > There are three alternatives : > > 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install tar utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Drawback: require tar at destination machine. > > 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. > > Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. > Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. > Drawback: complexity within our code. > > 3. Do not use tar but cpio, a patch is ready[2]. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Benefit: ability to use Fedora-19 minimal. > Drawback: cpio is even less common than tar, even if it exists in Fedora-19 it can be removed without anyone notice. > Drawback: most other distributions will not have cpio in their minimal installation. > > [[[ > There was 4rd alternative, using python tar module to deploy tar. > However, there is a bug in that module when processing last block if empty. > This is edge condition but happened to at least one of the users and I could > reproduce it. > ]]] > > What option do you prefer? > > Regards, > Alon Bar-Lev > > [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17295/ > [2] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "arch" <arch(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 6:11:38 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup Il 30/07/2013 15:12, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto: > Hello All, > > Starting the discussion again... > > I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state > presented to use by Fedora. > > Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to > deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). > > I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard > commonly used utility was removed. > > There are three alternatives : > > 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install > tar utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Drawback: require tar at destination machine. > > 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. > > Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. > Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. > Drawback: complexity within our code. > > 3. Do not use tar but cpio, a patch is ready[2]. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Benefit: ability to use Fedora-19 minimal. > Drawback: cpio is even less common than tar, even if it exists in Fedora-19 > it can be removed without anyone notice. > Drawback: most other distributions will not have cpio in their minimal > installation. > > [[[ > There was 4rd alternative, using python tar module to deploy tar. > However, there is a bug in that module when processing last block if empty. > This is edge condition but happened to at least one of the users and I > could > reproduce it. > ]]] > > What option do you prefer? Well, honestly, the solution I like more than the others is having the python tar bug fixed and be free to use the python tar lib. I would like to exclude cpio: it's on rpm based distro but not commonly available on others. I would like to exclude the RTFM solution, having it working out of the box. So my second choice is using a self extracting script. If you think pyar is a non standard tool, do you have considered the use of shar? Or do you think it's also a non standard tool?

> > Regards, > Alon Bar-Lev > > [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17295/ > [2] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com

Hello Again, I tend to keep state as-is, require tar at host machine. Whoever installs Fedora minimal should install tar manually.

I hope Fedora people will add tar per some of the requests, as tar is important utility in *NIX environment. I do not think that the extra complexity is required. If you strongly think otherwise, then I prefer to merge the self extracting python script. Speak now, and emphasis. Regards, Alon Bar-Lev. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "arch" <arch(a)ovirt.org&gt;, "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org&gt; > Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 4:12:03 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Users] [Feedback required][host-deploy] Fedora-19 misses tar at minimal setup > > Hello All, > > Starting the discussion again... > > I would like to receive feedback regarding how we should cope with a state > presented to use by Fedora. > > Fedora-19 minimal setup does not install tar utility which is required to > deploy files during the host-deploy process (Hosts->Add Host). > > I guess because of 2.8M in size (including translations) -- a standard > commonly used utility was removed. > > There are three alternatives : > > 1. Instruct users who are using minimal installations to manually install tar > utility just like they configure repository, dns, etc.. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Drawback: require tar at destination machine. > > 2. Do not use tar but self extracting python script, a patch is ready[1]. > > Benefit: ability to deploy environment in which tar is missing. > Drawback: non standard tool at destination machine. > Drawback: complexity within our code. > > 3. Do not use tar but cpio, a patch is ready[2]. > > Benefit: simplicity. > Benefit: use standard tools. > Benefit: lower payload to transmit. > Benefit: ability to use Fedora-19 minimal. > Drawback: cpio is even less common than tar, even if it exists in Fedora-19 > it can be removed without anyone notice. > Drawback: most other distributions will not have cpio in their minimal > installation. > > [[[ > There was 4rd alternative, using python tar module to deploy tar. > However, there is a bug in that module when processing last block if empty. > This is edge condition but happened to at least one of the users and I could > reproduce it. > ]]] > > What option do you prefer? > > Regards, > Alon Bar-Lev > > [1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17295/ > [2] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17396/ > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel > _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel