[Libosinfo] [Patch] bump default ubuntu RAM size

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 04:25:21PM +0200, Didier Roche wrote:
> Le 08/10/2018 à 13:21, Fabiano Fidêncio a écrit :
> > On Mon, 2018-10-08 at 13:12 +0200, Didier Roche wrote:
> > > 
> > > Yes, we can be more fine-grained, basically:
> > > * 16.04 -> Min and recommended is 2Gb (this was bumped when our
> > > 16.04.x
> > > maintenance image started to include snapd)
> > > * 18.04 and onward: 2Gb min, 4Gb recommended.
> > > However, if we bump recommended in that file to 4Gb, GNOME Boxes
> > > will
> > > set that as a default, which we aren't really keen on (the 4Gb
> > > recommended is a large estimate for people using a lot of tabs in
> > > their
> > > browser, which isn't our GNOME Boxes typical usage we are targeting
> > > at).
> > > 
> > > Does it makes sense?
> > 
> > On one hand it does, on the other hand ... I'd still prefer to have the
> > recommended amount of RAM properly set in osinfo-db.
> > 
> > AFAIR, in Boxes the user can change the amount of RAM to the minimum
> > one if their decide to do so.
> > 
> > Also, the recommended disk size has been increased, right? Would be
> > nice to have it changed as well.
> > 
> 
> It's a bit tricky because the configuration is shared between Ubuntu desktop
> & server.

Ah, it probably would make sense to be able to override these depending
on the type of image that we are dealing with. Maybe adding a 'variant'
attribute to the <resources> tag would do the trick.

> 
> We discussed that at length within the desktop team, and it seems the
> conscensus is to separate the physical install recommendations vs
> virtualised one. Will Cooke (manager of the desktop team) has just updated
> the wiki page: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements?action=diff&rev2=110&rev1=109.
> I hope that facilitate that patch which is increasing a non working
> configuration.

To me it's really unexpected that requirements for a 2.5 years old image
change like that :) But that's your project decision, libosinfo can just
follow suit...

Acked-by: Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/attachments/20181009/7c64115d/attachment.sig>