Re: [RFC 0/2] Remove Packages during Postprocessing

[Gylstorff Quirin <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>]

On 2/25/20 2:10 PM, Henning Schild wrote:
> Am Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:43:55 +0100
> schrieb Gylstorff Quirin <quirin.gylstorff@siemens.com>:
> 
>> On 2/24/20 3:24 PM, Henning Schild wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> my opinion on that is clear. Fix it upstream or live with those
>>> packages. You are either on a distro or fiddle around and tune
>>> everything until you are the only one on the planet testing your
>>> setup. That is Isar vs. yocto ... whoever thinks they _need_ that
>>> should maybe think again. If they need it they can put it into
>>> their own layer or use yocto ;).
>>> I do not think upstream should carry such hacky features unless we
>>> get better reasoning ... Removing "required" packages has the
>>> potential to break your image in funny ways ... that is much more
>>> expensive than a few MB disc space. All affected packages are
>>> likely already cleared and vulnerabilty monitored by someone else,
>>> find that someone and share the cost!
>>>
>>> Henning
>>
>> Hi Henning,
>>
>> I understand your concern and I think you are right. But some people
>> already hack the build process in similar ways and this is a way to
>> give them some support.
> 
> I guess it might be a good idea to tell those hackers to comment here
> or share their reasons with you. My guess is that their need is
> questionable and they did not fully understand the consequences. It
> should probably be discarded as premature optimization and removed from
> the downstream layer, instead of added upstream.
> 
> Even if they carefully looked at the consequences for the packages they
> remove, a generic upstream feature would ease the hack for people less
> careful.

FYI

I got the same patch yesterday again for stripping a rescue system to
fit into a NOR Flash.

Quirin