On 12/08/2017 04:35 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 12:50 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> On 11/28/2017 02:03 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> Like all good bits of software, the kernel.spec has grown over time.
>>> Part of this growth has come from building more of the userspace
>>> tools that live under the tools directory of the kernel. I've been
>>> experimenting with moving these to a separate spec file.
>>>
>>> Advantages:
>>> - Less stuff in the kernel.spec file (~300 line deletion)
>>> - Fewer build deps for things like perf
>>> - People building the kernel only get the kernel
>>> - Issues with userspace tools don't impact the kernel
>>> - Can likely drop most of the debuginfo regex nightmare for the userspace
packages
>>>
>>> Disadvantages:
>>> - Would need to manually keep in sync on some cadence. This is mostly
>>> an issue for rawhide. Could we actually get away with only re-building
>>> on each new kernel version or do we need to resync on each -rc?
>>> - Would probably need to rework how tools are tied to kernel versions at
>>> the package level
>>> - Others added here
>>>
>>> I've experimented with something at
https://pagure.io/kernel-tools-pkggit
>>> which is mostly a copy/paste of parts of the kernel.spec file. I'm
>>> mostly looking for general feedback about if this a good idea but
>>> I'm also interested in specific feedback if you have it.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Laura
>>
>> Giving this some thought, this is still a proposal I want to push forward.
>> The biggest feedback I heard about this was
>>
>> - Synchronization
>> - Applying patches across the tree
>>
>> For the synchronization issue, Don Zickus pointed out that we can
>> use Requires as needed. We have this already on some of the kernel
>> packages and can add others as needed. It's also very easy to
>> ask users to update to a newer package if something gets out of
>> sync.
>>
>> I don't have a great solution for cases where patches are applied
>> across the tree and touch both the kernel and userspace tools.
>> Such patches are bad style IMHO since the userspace tools are
>> supposed to be userspace programs. For Fedora's usage, such
>> patches would probably exist separately for such a short period
>> of time that I don't think it would be difficult to manage.
>> Fedora gets very few patches for the tools anyway.
>>
>> Someone also mentioned the hyperv-daemons existing as a separate
>> spec file. I'd be okay with moving that into kernel-tools for
>> easier management as well.
>>
>> I'll post the link to the bugzilla package review when that
>> happens.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Laura
>
> Review is at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1523909
>
> Thanks,
> Laura
The review was approved so I started the request for the new
repo
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/3728
Thanks,
Laura
The tools are now removed from kernel.spec so going forward
on rawhide you must make changes to the kernel-tools package.
I did the initial import but have not yet kicked off the
build. I will do so after -rc7 on Monday.
Thanks,
Laura