Hi

I noticed that ceph-base has rather extensive Depends that rise some eyebrows

Depends: binutils, ceph-common (= 18.2.8+ds-2.1), cryptsetup-bin |
  cryptsetup, e2fsprogs, gdisk, hdparm | sdparm, logrotate, nvme-cli,
  parted, psmisc, smartmontools, uuid-runtime, xfsprogs, python3:any,
  libaio1t64 (>= 0.3.93), libc6 (>= 2.38), libcap2 (>= 1:2.10), libfmt10
  (>= 10.1.1+ds1), libgcc-s1 (>= 3.4), libgoogle-perftools4t64 (>=
  2.18.1), liblz4-1 (>= 0.0~r130), libpmem1 (>= 1.4), librados2 (>=
  18.2.8+ds), libsnappy1v5 (>= 1.2.2), libstdc++6 (>= 14), liburing2 (>=
  2.3), zlib1g (>= 1:1.2.0)


But I am pretty sure some of these are not actually strictly required.


e2fsprogs, xfsprogs - only needed for filestore osds, which are
deprecated for a very long time. I do not think they actually need to be
there by default.


parted, gdisk, hdparm, sdparm - probably also not needed. At least not
in ceph-base. Maybe some of them are semi-required in cephadm or
ceph-volume, but not in ceph-base afaik. (I do not think they are even
required there).

Similar for nvme-cli, smartmontools, psmisc, and logrotate, and probably
also cryptsetup.


Additionally somehow install ceph-base also installs:

ceph-fuse - unclear how, or why ceph-base require this (EDIT: This is
via transitive Recommends of ceph-mds which Recommends (but should not)
ceph-fuse - ceph-mds is server, but ceph-fuse is client. There is close
to zero reason to have ceph-fuse coinstalled with ceph-mds)

and also Recommends: ceph-mds - again, even less logical.



I see that ceph-base has ceph-smartctl script, but that probably belongs
more in ceph-osd package.





Just some observations.

I understand that some of the packages in Depends are kind of nice to
have on osd machines, but almost all of them would be more of
Suggestions or nice-to-have in ceph-osd. Almost none of them are
actually required, and none in ceph-base).

Regards,
Witold