From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27842 invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2006 23:15:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 27833 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Oct 2006 23:15:39 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail8.fw-bc.sony.com (HELO mail8.fw-bc.sony.com) (160.33.98.75) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:15:36 +0000 Received: from mail3.sjc.in.sel.sony.com (mail3.sjc.in.sel.sony.com [43.134.1.211]) by mail8.fw-bc.sony.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k9VNFBZl029494; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:15:11 GMT Received: from [43.134.85.135] ([43.134.85.135]) by mail3.sjc.in.sel.sony.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k9VNFBme022339; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:15:11 GMT Message-ID: <4547DA33.4050509@am.sony.com> Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 01:37:00 -0000 From: Tim Bird User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060614) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vara Prasad CC: "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Badari Pulavarty , systemtap@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Anyone tried SystemTap with the latest RHEL5 Beta refresh References: <9AE298E00BCF7B469C04BE82FCE78B8701C74AAD@scsmsx414.amr.corp.intel.com> <1161980695.31009.17.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <45464423.4070709@us.ibm.com> <20061030183343.GQ4978@redhat.com> <4547D66B.3010505@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <4547D66B.3010505@us.ibm.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q4/txt/msg00301.txt.bz2 Vara Prasad wrote: >> Unfortunately, other customers prefer that systemtap's loose >> dependencies (particularly, the kernel-debuginfo) not be installed by >> default, even if they choose an "install everything" option at the >> anaconda screens. Can you think of a way of satisfying both groups? >> >> - FChE >> >> > O.k, before i think of a way to satisfy both the needs i need to > understand the objection of the other group. > The objection of other customers to not to install debuginfo package is > it because of wasted disk space due to large size of debuginfo package > or time to install or something else. > I am assuming kernel debuginfo is considered a dependency for SystemTap, > am i right. > What is the point of installing a package that doesn't work due to lack > of dependencies? In other words are we not breaking the semantics or > meaning of full package install if we don't install required > dependencies when the customer chooses a package to install. I won't answer the last question ("what's the point of installing a non-functional package?"). But how about creating a stap wrapper that checks for required dependencies. If present, the wrapper removes itself from the invocation chain (e.g. by renaming itself and real stap) and then calls the real stap. If the dependencies are not present, the wrapper could tell the user to install the required packages (or do it itself). ============================= Tim Bird Architecture Group Chair, CE Linux Forum Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Electronics =============================