Re: zlib compress bit-identical output on different archs - goal or non-goal?
by Pavel Raiskup
On Monday, December 10, 2018 11:01:23 PM CET Jeremy Linton wrote:
> OTOH, there is a move to provide some additional maintainer cover as
> zlib itself could use some attention (and not just on optimization
> fronts being brought up on arm arch's).
Do you have a links to those discussions?
Pavel
5 years, 6 months
_performance_build and -O3 package builds
by Florian Weimer
Downstream, we had a separate set of builds flags for certain packages
and used -O3 there, targeted at POWER (both ppc64 and ppc64le), for
increased use of vectorization presumably.
I don't think this was ever upstreamed to Fedora (the downstream changes
were in the redhat-rpm-config package). I don't recall seeing a
corresponding Fedora change. As a result, the recent downstream rebase
lost support for this.
Should Fedora package maintainers remove _performance_build support or
custom flag overrides for -O3 from their packages?
My understanding is that Fedora build flag policy is set by the
redhat-rpm-config package, which currently specifies -O2 for all
architectures.
Thanks,
Florian
5 years, 6 months
[HEADS UP] Ceph-14.x.x, dropping 32-bit archs
by Kaleb S. KEITHLEY
Ceph 14.x.x (Nautilus) will no longer be built on i686 and armv7hl archs
starting in fedora-30/rawhide.
The upstream project doesn't support it. The armv7hl builders don't have
enough memory (or address space) to build some components.
And the other active maintainer (branto) and I don't have cycles to
devote to keeping it building on 32-bit archs.
(FWIW, currently ceph-12.2.9 (luminous) is in rawhide, f29, and f28 and
it has packages for i686 and armv7hl for people who want to run ceph on
32-bit archs.)
--
Kaleb
5 years, 6 months