#198 Silverblue/Kinoite (ostree systems) setup after installation
Opened 2 years ago by rlengland. Modified 8 months ago

Article Summary:

This article will include the basic and advanced modification that the user can do to their system as well as its comprehensive description of what it is about and else.

Article Description:

Since there are barely materials that covers a good setup after installation for Fedora OSTree, there is a need for a comprehensive and a detailed one which will cover what are the things that can be done and the improvements it will give. Moreover, the article will also include tip and tricks that the user can do to improve their workflow and the system overall, for example, disabling of some of the apps that is not needed, or turning off the workqueue for SSD which is not needed, among other things.

There are articles that do not cover these, but if they do, they do not give what are those for or what it will improve, along with its consequences and potential dangers. Thus, I decided to propose this one.

https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/article-proposal-silverblue-kinoite-ostree-systems-setup-after-installation/82461


Metadata Update from @rlengland:
- Issue tagged with: article, needs-image

2 years ago

Metadata Update from @iaacornus:
- Issue assigned to iaacornus

a year ago

Metadata Update from @iaacornus:
- Custom field preview-link adjusted to https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=38664&preview=true&preview_id=38664(opens in a new tab)

a year ago

@iaacornus : I just took a quick look at your article and I noticed that you are pointing people to RPM Fusion. Unfortunately, Fedora Magazine has been asked to not promote RPM Fusion. Sorry, but any reference to RPM Fusion will have to be removed before this article can be published.

Let us know when you have removed the references to RPM Fusion and then we can work on getting this article published.

@iaacornus : I just took a quick look at your article and I noticed that you are pointing people to RPM Fusion. Unfortunately, Fedora Magazine has been asked to not promote RPM Fusion. Sorry, but any reference to RPM Fusion will have to be removed before this article can be published.

Let us know when you have removed the references to RPM Fusion and then we can work on getting this article published.

I'll note of that and will make the revision as soon as possible, since currently I'm loaded with my works in academia.

I have some clarification to ask, would be the section "RPMfusion Reinstall" and other sections that have the RPMfusion as prerequisite be acceptable?

Metadata Update from @iaacornus:
- Custom field preview-link adjusted to https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=38664 (was: https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=38664&preview=true&preview_id=38664(opens in a new tab))

a year ago

@iaacornus my suspicion is that section will lead to questions about installing RPMfusion in the first place and it might be best to omit it.

Input @glb ??

My recollection of the request from the Fedora Project Leader (Matthew Miller) was that we not advertise/promote RPM Fusion. I don't really know anything about the reasoning behind the decision. My interpretation of the request is that we should not mention RPM Fusion at all. I think what people mention in the comments is more of a gray area because that is more closely associated with the user rather than the Fedora Project or Fedora Magazine.

@iaacornus my suspicion is that section will lead to questions about installing RPMfusion in the first place and it might be best to omit it.

Input @glb ??

well not really, it just suggests to the user that if it installed rpmfusion, then it should replace it with the unversioned one. other sections provides guides about drivers and codecs which is in the rpmfusion, however, those codecs and drivers play a crucial role in improvement of system's performance, hence I can't simply remove those, although the sections do not encourage or recommend the installation of the rpmfusion, but just informs the user that the codecs are drivers are located there.

@iaacornus : I just took a quick look at your article and I noticed that you are pointing people to RPM Fusion. Unfortunately, Fedora Magazine has been asked to not promote RPM Fusion. Sorry, but any reference to RPM Fusion will have to be removed before this article can be published.

Let us know when you have removed the references to RPM Fusion and then we can work on getting this article published.

should i really remove all of the rpmfusion mentions even though it does not suggest the installation of rpmfusion itself but just requires it?

RH asked that we not promote RPM Fusion and they pay for the hosting of this site. I don't want to "bite the hand that feeds us" so to speak.

Any mention of RPM Fusion or any packages from RPM Fusion (including those listed below) will need to be removed before this article can be published on this blog.

ffmpeg-libs (rpmfusion-free-updates)
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly (rpmfusion-free-updates)
intel-media-driver (rpmfusion-nonfree-updates)
intel-media-driver (rpmfusion-nonfree-updates)
mesa-va-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-va-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)

If you want to see if an exception can be made or voice your concern/disagreement with this policy, Matthew Miller would be the one to ping. It's possible that I'm being too strict with my interpretation of what RH has requested. But again, because they are funding this operation, I will error on the side of caution unless explicitly told otherwise.

RH asked that we not promote RPM Fusion and they pay for the hosting of this site. I don't want to "bite the hand that feeds us" so to speak.

Any mention of RPM Fusion or any packages from RPM Fusion (including those listed below) will need to be removed before this article can be published on this blog.

ffmpeg-libs (rpmfusion-free-updates)
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly (rpmfusion-free-updates)
intel-media-driver (rpmfusion-nonfree-updates)
intel-media-driver (rpmfusion-nonfree-updates)
mesa-va-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-va-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)
mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld (rpmfusion-free-updates)

If you want to see if an exception can be made or voice your concern/disagreement with this policy, Matthew Miller would be the one to ping. It's possible that I'm being too strict with my interpretation of what RH has requested. But again, because they are funding this operation, I will error on the side of caution unless explicitly told otherwise.

Greetings, @mattdm, I'd love to discuss a possible exception in regards to the said violation of the rules here, perhaps there are workarounds.

@iaacornus: Is the following command from your guide correct? It appears to be uninstalling and reinstalling the same package.

sudo rpm-ostree update --uninstall rpmfusion-free-release --uninstall rpmfusion-nonfree-release --install rpmfusion-free-release --install rpmfusion-nonfree-release

Also, with regard to my earlier comments about not naming/promoting RPM Fusion, I'd be willing to bend the rules a little if you can replace all mentions of RPM Fusion with something like "third-party repositories". So, for example, the above command might become something like the following.

sudo rpm-ostree update --uninstall <versioned-third-party-repo-name-here> --install <unversioned-third-party-repo-name-here> [--uninstall <versioned-third-party-repo-name-here> --install <unversioned-third-party-repo-name-here> ...]

However, the codec packages you've named in your article would still need to be removed.

Sorry that I'm being so strict. But since violating "the rules" (albethey incredibly vague rules/suggestions) could have a very negative impact on Fedora Magazine, I don't want to take any chances. If you want to continue to wait on a response from Matthew Miller, you may do so. I know that he is aware of your question here. But if Matthew Miller doesn't respond within say one week, I'd take that as a de facto "I'm not going to advise that you bend these rules" from Matthew Miller. (It may well be that the legal quandary is such that he cannot really say anything. Again, I don't really know.) Richard and I are a little more free to speak of the issue because we are not in any way employed or supported by RH. But that same "distance" is also why we don't really know the details of what is going on.

TL;DR, you are free to wait for a more official response, but I'd (personally) take no response as a "no" after a week or so.

Just my two cents.

@iaacornus: Is the following command from your guide correct? It appears to be uninstalling and reinstalling the same package.

sudo rpm-ostree update --uninstall rpmfusion-free-release --uninstall rpmfusion-nonfree-release --install rpmfusion-free-release --install rpmfusion-nonfree-release

yep, it uninstalls the versioned rpmfusion and installs the unversioned one.

Also, with regard to my earlier comments about not naming/promoting RPM Fusion, I'd be willing to bend the rules a little if you can replace all mentions of RPM Fusion with something like "third-party repositories". So, for example, the above command might become something like the following.

sudo rpm-ostree update --uninstall rpmfusion-free-release --uninstall rpmfusion-nonfree-release --install rpmfusion-free-release --install rpmfusion-nonfree-release

Also, with regard to my earlier comments about not naming/promoting RPM Fusion, I'd be willing to bend the rules a little if you can replace all mentions of RPM Fusion with something like "third-party repositories". So, for example, the above command might become something like the following.

sudo rpm-ostree update --uninstall <versioned-third-party-repo-name-here> --install <unversioned-third-party-repo-name-here> [--uninstall <versioned-third-party-repo-name-here> --install <unversioned-third-party-repo-name-here> ...]

However, the codec packages you've named in your article would still need to be removed.

Sorry that I'm being so strict. But since violating "the rules" (albethey incredibly vague rules/suggestions) could have a very negative impact on Fedora Magazine, I don't want to take any chances. If you want to continue to wait on a response from Matthew Miller, you may do so. I know that he is aware of your question here. But if Matthew Miller doesn't respond within say one week, I'd take that as a de facto "I'm not going to advise that you bend these rules" from Matthew Miller. (It may well be that the legal quandary is such that he cannot really say anything. Again, I don't really know.) Richard and I are a little more free to speak of the issue because we are not in any way employed or supported by RH. But that same "distance" is also why we don't really know the details of what is going on.

TL;DR, you are free to wait for a more official response, but I'd (personally) take no response as a "no" after a week or so.

Just my two cents.

Thank you, I'll take those advice and incorporate it on the article, thank you understading it, I appreciate it.

do i need to remove all of the codecs and drivers? or only particular ones?

do i need to remove all of the codecs and drivers? or only particular ones?

Any codecs you recommend will need to have a license from this list.

Also, no software/codecs from RPM Fusion may be recommended.

Thanks.

do i need to remove all of the codecs and drivers? or only particular ones?

Any codecs you recommend will need to have a license from this list.

Also, no software/codecs from RPM Fusion may be recommended.

Thanks.

Noted, I already updated the post and it shall no longer contain any mentions of rpmfusion and codecs.

Metadata Update from @iaacornus:
- Assignee reset
- Issue untagged with: article, needs-image

a year ago

Metadata Update from @rlengland:
- Issue assigned to iaacornus
- Issue tagged with: article, needs-image

a year ago

Metadata Update from @glb:
- Custom field editor adjusted to glb
- Custom field image-editor adjusted to iaacornus
- Custom field publish adjusted to 2023-09-04
- Issue untagged with: needs-image

a year ago

@iaacornus I've made an editing pass on this. Let us know if you see any problems. Otherwise, we'll run this on Monday.

Thanks!

Metadata Update from @glb:
- Assignee reset
- Custom field editor reset (from glb)
- Custom field image-editor reset (from iaacornus)
- Custom field publish reset (from 2023-09-04)
- Issue untagged with: article

a year ago

Issue tagged with: article

a year ago

Metadata Update from @glb:
- Custom field editor adjusted to glb
- Custom field image-editor adjusted to iaacornus
- Custom field publish adjusted to 2023-09-04
- Issue assigned to iaacornus

a year ago

@iaacornus I've made an editing pass on this. Let us know if you see any problems. Otherwise, we'll run this on Monday.

Thanks!

thank you very much.

From https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/looking-for-the-discussion-related-to-fedora-libostree-post-installation-setup-modifications-and-tips-and-tricks/89053/3 :

So I've just found out about this now that the article has been published and this article has a lot of not great recommendations.

It would have been appreciated if you could have pinged Silverblue / Kinoite maintainers (for example on the forum) for a review before publishing it.

It would have been appreciated if you could have pinged Silverblue / Kinoite maintainers (for example on the forum) for a review before publishing it.

I'd be happy to do that. (I don't consider myself a libostree guru.) Sorry that I didn't think to ping you on this one. In the future, I'll add the #silverblue-team tag to any article proposals about silverblue so that you will be made aware of them.

@rlengland ^^

I don't really have the time right now to write a full review but at this point, we should consider pulling the article out until it's updated and reviewed.

I'll go ahead and remove it from Fedora Magazine. However, there may be copies on feed readers that will not go way.

Sorry @glb and @siosm ,
I didn't review this article and should have.

Okay so I looked a bit at the article this morning and it does need a bit more editing on factual things and some english language things. First this statement "A libostree or “image-based” OS, on the other hand, is an immutable system. It fetches the image and “layers” it on top of the current one during an upgrade, providing more robust and reliable system upgrades." Should read more like ... "A libostree or “image-based” OS, on the other hand, fetches the image, and the users settings in /etc plus the layered packages that rpm-ostree tracks and does a three way merge to create a new image locally that is representative of the users current system with the updates."
@siosm WDYT? I will review it more later today.
[edit] also this does not work on Silverblue or any of Fedora's libostree based systems 'sudo grubby --update-kernel=ALL --args="mem_sleep_default=deep"' It would have to use rpm-ostree with kargs to make the change and sudo would not be needed. I'm going to make a Silverblue install and go through the article piece by piece.

Okay so I looked a bit at the article this morning and it does need a bit more editing on factual things and some english language things. First this statement "A libostree or “image-based” OS, on the other hand, is an immutable system. It fetches the image and “layers” it on top of the current one during an upgrade, providing more robust and reliable system upgrades." Should read more like ... "A libostree or “image-based” OS, on the other hand, fetches the image, and the users settings in /etc plus the layered packages that rpm-ostree tracks and does a three way merge to create a new image locally that is representative of the users current system with the updates."
@siosm WDYT? I will review it more later today.
[edit] also this does not work on Silverblue or any of Fedora's libostree based systems 'sudo grubby --update-kernel=ALL --args="mem_sleep_default=deep"' It would have to use rpm-ostree with kargs to make the change and sudo would not be needed. I'm going to make a Silverblue install and go through the article piece by piece.

that finding is interesting, I recently did sudo grubby --update-kernel=ALL --args="mem_sleep_default=deep" and it worked for some reason, I'll take a look into that, thank you for pointing it out. I'll incorporate all of the suggestions and fix the errors in my article, thank you.

I apologize for all the erroneous information in my article to all of the people involved in this, @siosm , @glb , @jakfrost . I'll be sure to incorporate all of your suggestions to fix the pitfalls and errors in the information, as well as the not-so-great stuff. Thank you for your patience, I once again apologize for the bother.

Hello @iaacornus,
It isn't a bother. The article is a good idea IMO.
WRT using the grubby command, I guess it could work if you have your
system set to be live. Also, grubby is just a script and it wouldn't be
too hard to change args to kargs, I'll look at it or @siosm could
correct me if I'm wrong about that. In that case it could just be
another feature added I didn't notice so no hard feelings there at all.
On Wed, 2023-09-06 at 16:24 +0000, James Aaron Erang wrote:

=20
iaacornus added a new comment to an issue you are following:
I apologize for all the erroneous information in my article to all of the people involved in this, @siosm , @glb , @jakfrost . I'll be sure to incorporate all of your suggestions to fix the pitfalls and errors in the information, as well as the not-so-great stuff. Thank you for your patience, I once again apologize for the bother.
=20
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-magazine-newsroom/issue/198

@iaacornus I'm moving this card back to "in progress" since the required changes are significant. Let us know with a comment here when the article is ready to go back out to publication.

Metadata Update from @glb:
- Custom field publish reset (from 2023-09-04)

a year ago

@iaacornus I'm moving this card back to "in progress" since the required changes are significant. Let us know with a comment here when the article is ready to go back out to publication.

noted, I'll take care of all the errors in the post and will notify you once it is done.

@iaacornus Checking in with you to see if you have had an opportunity to work on this article. Please let us know when you have it ready for another review.

Thanks

@iaacornus Can you give us an update on the status for this article? We can move this back to the "Ideas" category if you won't have a chance to complete it.

Moved to "Ideas" category in Pagure. We can resume the publication process when necessary.

@iaacornus I am moving this article to the "Stalled" category. It will still be here when you have time to work on it but we won't nag you about it. 😄

Log in to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Boards 1
articles Status: stalled