You are not logged in.
I noticed that there are many packages from base group that I have never used. I know it doesn't hurt to keep them installed but can I safely remove some of them, e.g. s-nail, xfsprogs, reiserfsprogs, mdadm, netctl etc.
So, is it a very bad idea to remove anything from base group? Will it hamper my system or cause issues in future?
Offline
Rule of thumb: If you are not sure if you need it - keep it. There are many ressources available to find out what the different packages are for. If you have questions about a specific package feel free to ask, but I don't see the point in listing the packages you probably won't need and explain why (which in any case would also be simply guessing because only you know your system)
Offline
Moving to NC...
Offline
The base group is nothing special. You can remove packages if you are sure that you don't need them. Pacman's dependency checking should prevent you from removing dependencies of other packages that you have installed.
Of course, if you remove core system files, then the system won't work, but that has to do with the package itself and not the base group.
My Arch Linux Stuff • Forum Etiquette • Community Ethos - Arch is not for everyone
Offline
@Xyne looking through bug reports it seems not that clear cut such as https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/46831#comment140324 and https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/53919#comment157443
Edit:
formatting
Last edited by loqs (2017-06-19 21:50:33)
Offline
Thanks everyone!
Comment by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Wednesday, 03 May 2017, 17:09 GMT
Exactly what Doug said. The base group is expected to be installed on *every* Arch system.
I think that all the wiki articles are also written assuming that everything from "base" group is available. So I am not going to uninstall anything.
However, a warning "messing with base group might set your house on fire" should be written in red bold font somewhere on the official wiki! Cheers!
Offline
You can remove the various filesystem utils/progs for every filesystem you're sure to not (never, mind external storage devices!) deal with.
Same goes for mdadm (raid), crypsetup (encrypted FS), and lvm2 (logical volumes) in case.
You can remove netctl and dhcpcd if you are sure to not use them to configure your network.
You can remove pcmciautils if you do not have such bus.
You can in theory remove man-db and man-pages, but you're then using the wrong distro for sure.
About everything else (on a quick look): leave it. You're gonna shoot yourself by removing it unless you *really* know what you're doing.
Offline
There's plenty of stuff in base that can be removed; but as the bug reports say, some packages will implicitly depend on packages in base. If you don't understand what can break and are able to deal with it yourself, it's best to leave it alone.
Last edited by Scimmia (2017-06-20 09:19:13)
Online
@seth: Sir, I'm quite sure I'm using the right distro and I appreciate all the help.
Made a wiki edit: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pa … g_packages
For the sake of completeness:
Actually keeping the whole base group installed is not future-proof. Let's say tomorrow a new package is added to base group and later on some other package implicitly depends on this package. Now "pacman -Syu" or "pacman -S some-other-package" will not pull the new base package as dependency and will likely cause issues with some-other-package.
I know these cases are rare (Systemd to OpenRC), but I cannot say this kind of breakage is "fully unintentional".
Offline
I rolled back the wiki edit. While the intention was good, warning Arch users not to uninstall packages from any group runs counter to the Arch Way. If something breaks as a result, people are expected to be competent enough to fix it, and learn from the experience.
Offline
$ comm -13 <(pacman -Qgq base) <(pacman -Sgq base)
cryptsetup
device-mapper
jfsutils
licenses
logrotate
lvm2
mdadm
nano
netctl
reiserfsprogs
s-nail
vi
xfsprogs
Uninstall all you want but be responsible for your system. That second half is crossed out as it should go without saying and is not a specific caveate to this situation but a general requirement of archers.
"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" - Richard Stallman
Online
You can in theory remove man-db and man-pages, but you're then using the wrong distro for sure.
There are tomes in the archives that recount tales of the Archers of old, who dedicated themselves to the discipline of the command-line before the packaging of Xorg. Through years of diligent study and asceticism, they ascended to a higher plane of binary consciousness where the very content of the man pages is visibly woven into the very fabric of all perception. They removed the man pages from their systems, proclaiming it cruft and cursing it, but that's not a story the man page packagers would tell you.
These stories are kept secret to protect the initiates. I warn you all to be weary of those who do not require man pages. Never let your children wander the countryside alone. No child should be forced to learn all of gcc's options.
For the sake of completeness:
Actually keeping the whole base group installed is not future-proof. Let's say tomorrow a new package is added to base group and later on some other package implicitly depends on this package. Now "pacman -Syu" or "pacman -S some-other-package" will not pull the new base package as dependency and will likely cause issues with some-other-package.
I know these cases are rare(Systemd to OpenRC), but I cannot say this kind of breakage is "fully unintentional".
This is why I have argued at length for the explicit inclusion of all direct deps. Assuming that the base group is installed is an example of laziness defying technical correctness. An argument could be made for a truly minimalist "base" group that is required for every system to run, but it is difficult to determine what that would be when considering chroots and other valid uses.
You can find the most recent discussion here.
My Arch Linux Stuff • Forum Etiquette • Community Ethos - Arch is not for everyone
Offline
There are tomes in the archives that recount tales of the Archers of old, who dedicated themselves to the discipline of the command-line before the packaging of Xorg. Through years of diligent study and asceticism, they ascended to a higher plane of binary consciousness where the very content of the man pages is visibly woven into the very fabric of all perception. They removed the man pages from their systems, proclaiming it cruft and cursing it, but that's not a story the man page packagers would tell you.
No true archer needs man pages.
Not as long as they have info pages.
"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" - Richard Stallman
Online
Or internet access ...
I'm though stunned that Xyne was trained with a paddle - I seem to recall a vague dream where I was being tied to a chair, a wire plugged into my neck and since I woke up some hours later, I know Linux!
And Kung Fu.
Offline