On Monday, March 4, 2019 10:01:14 AM CET Petr Ĺ abata wrote:
Replying in general.
While it's never been entirely the same, I'd also like our mock configs
to be as close to koji environment as possible. In the current
situation that would mean no modules being available.
I don't understand your point of view. If it is safe to enable modular
repositories on user boxes by default (that's what we have now), why we
can not enable them in koji and why we can not enable them in mock?
Once/if we proceed with one of the
modules-in-the-non-modular-buildroot
proposals, I would like them to include the same module set that is
available in the non-modular buildroot in koji.
Can you elaborate? How the 'non-modular buildroot in koji' differs from
modules-in-the-non-modular-buildroot?
If you're building content that depends on modular packages at
this
point, you should be building a module anyway.
Please elaborate on "why" on this, too.
In that case your local MBS manages the build and pulls the relevant
packages for you.
Ok, but consider that
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 \
--config-opts module_enable=postgresql:10
--rebuild my.srpm
is much more convenient and economical than approaching the whole MBS
"thingy".
Pavel
But I also kinda like the idea of having two configs -- one that
aims to somewhat replicate the koji experience and one that's
close to installations. Not sure if there's really any value in
it, though.
P