Interesting blog on simplifying packaging for OS bootstrapping
by Jason L Tibbitts III
So I stumbled upon this blog post:
http://developerblog.redhat.com/2014/12/19/bootstrapping-power8-little-en...
and there are a few things in there which seem like they might be good
to incorporate into our packaging guidelines, or perhaps into our
tooling (rpm up through mock and koji). Random thoughts follow.
Dependency minimization is obviously a big one; we struggle with this.
Build-time dependency minimization is far more difficult. Is there any
value in standardizing methods (probably using conditionals in the spec)
to minimize build-time dependencies? If you have a very core package
that needs the whole X stack to build one of its subpackages, maybe
conditionalize the build so that you can build without that subpackage
and not need X. (autoconf needs emacs? Wow.)
I think currently we have only one or two places where we absolutely
require lua for scriptlets. bash is the only one I can think of,
because it would otherwise need itself to install. Is there value in
using it more often, for more core packages?
I wonder how many packages have additional build-time dependencies
solely for running %check. Would it be reasonable to be able to
separate these somehow (BuildRequires(check): foo) and to pass up
disabling %check through our tooling?
- J<
9 years, 3 months
Summary/Minutes from today's FPC Meeting (2015-01-08 17:00 - 19:00 UTC)
by James Antill
======================
#fedora-meeting-1: fpc
======================
Meeting started by geppetto at 17:01:24 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2015-01-08/fpc.2015-01-...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Roll Call (geppetto, 17:01:25)
* #484 Minor PHP Guidelines update (for PSR-4) (geppetto, 17:05:52)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/484 (geppetto, 17:05:52)
* ACTION: Minor PHP Guidelines update, for PSR-4 (+1:6, 0:1, -1:0)
(geppetto, 17:12:35)
* #486 help2man (geppetto, 17:13:08)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/486 (geppetto, 17:13:08)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Manpages
(tibbs|w, 17:25:55)
* ACTION: Including help2man reference (+1:6, 0:1, -1:1) (geppetto,
17:30:14)
* #488 [RFC] Please update Python_Eggs packaging guidelines (geppetto,
17:30:28)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/488 (geppetto, 17:30:29)
* ACTION: Please update Python_Eggs packaging guidelines (+1:8, 0:0,
-1:0) (geppetto, 17:34:36)
* #489 Ruby guidelines: Updates for Minitest 5 (geppetto, 17:34:46)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/489 (geppetto, 17:34:46)
* ACTION: Would be nice if one of the main ruby packagers for Fedora
could make a macro for this. (geppetto, 17:40:48)
* ACTION: Ruby guidelines: Update guidelines due to lack of testrb
(+1:7, 0:0, -1:1) (geppetto, 17:45:30)
* #443 Requesting Bundling exception for Love (liblove sub package)
(geppetto, 17:45:54)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/443 (geppetto, 17:45:55)
* ACTION: Need more information on all 3 bundle requests, how much
custom code is there, how much work would it take to unbundle etc.
(geppetto, 17:59:57)
* #209 Please define policy regarding instantiated application
(geppetto, 18:00:10)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/209 (geppetto, 18:00:10)
* #208 Please add policy regarding socket activated services
(geppetto, 18:02:10)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/208 (geppetto, 18:02:10)
* ACTION: Someone needs to write the policy, feel free to try to work
with someone experienced with writing policy to help you (geppetto,
18:03:23)
* #478 Proposal: Package Guidelines: DevAssistant Assistant packages
(DAP) (geppetto, 18:04:03)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/478 (geppetto, 18:04:03)
* #481 static uids systemd-network, systemd-timesync, systemd-resolve
(geppetto, 18:06:43)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/481 (geppetto, 18:06:43)
* ACTION: zbyszek Can you answer: Why can't you chown in the
initramfs? What kind of state/data is in the initramsfs, or is it
just the uid security? Why do they need to be started before the
system has booted? (geppetto, 18:16:33)
* #412 Please change the packaging guidelines to include packaging
(geppetto, 18:19:10)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/412 (geppetto, 18:19:10)
* ACTION: follow vote from 9 months ago, writeup policy in description
(geppetto, 18:26:35)
* Open Floor (geppetto, 18:27:05)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/490 (tibbs|w, 18:29:04)
* LINK:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRequires_2
(tibbs|w, 18:36:49)
Meeting ended at 18:59:46 UTC.
Action Items
------------
* Minor PHP Guidelines update, for PSR-4 (+1:6, 0:1, -1:0)
* Including help2man reference (+1:6, 0:1, -1:1)
* Please update Python_Eggs packaging guidelines (+1:8, 0:0, -1:0)
* Would be nice if one of the main ruby packagers for Fedora could make
a macro for this.
* Ruby guidelines: Update guidelines due to lack of testrb (+1:7, 0:0,
-1:1)
* Need more information on all 3 bundle requests, how much custom code
is there, how much work would it take to unbundle etc.
* Someone needs to write the policy, feel free to try to work with
someone experienced with writing policy to help you
* zbyszek Can you answer: Why can't you chown in the initramfs? What
kind of state/data is in the initramsfs, or is it just the uid
security? Why do they need to be started before the system has booted?
* follow vote from 9 months ago, writeup policy in description
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* Minor PHP Guidelines update, for PSR-4 (+1:6, 0:1, -1:0)
* Including help2man reference (+1:6, 0:1, -1:1)
* Please update Python_Eggs packaging guidelines (+1:8, 0:0, -1:0)
* Would be nice if one of the main ruby packagers for Fedora could
make a macro for this.
* Ruby guidelines: Update guidelines due to lack of testrb (+1:7, 0:0,
-1:1)
* Need more information on all 3 bundle requests, how much custom code
is there, how much work would it take to unbundle etc.
* Someone needs to write the policy, feel free to try to work with
someone experienced with writing policy to help you
* zbyszek Can you answer: Why can't you chown in the initramfs? What
kind of state/data is in the initramsfs, or is it just the uid
security? Why do they need to be started before the system has
booted?
* follow vote from 9 months ago, writeup policy in description
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* geppetto (182)
* tibbs|w (122)
* limburgher (34)
* tomspur (17)
* racor (16)
* Rathann (13)
* SmootherFrOgZ (11)
* orionp (11)
* zodbot (10)
* RemiFedora (7)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
9 years, 3 months
Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2015-01-08 17:00 UTC), Followup:15 New:7
by James Antill
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2015-01-08 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2015-01-08 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PST
2015-01-08 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EST
2015-01-08 17:00 Thu UTC <-
2015-01-08 17:00 Thu Europe/London <-
2015-01-08 18:00 Thu Europe/Paris CET
2015-01-08 18:00 Thu Europe/Berlin CET
2015-01-08 22:30 Thu Asia/Calcutta IST
------------------new day----------------------
2015-01-09 01:00 Fri Asia/Singapore SGT
2015-01-09 01:00 Fri Asia/Hong_Kong HKT
2015-01-09 02:00 Fri Asia/Tokyo JST
2015-01-09 03:00 Fri Australia/Brisbane EST
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13
= Followups =
(needed policy, feature not accepted yet)
#topic #466 recommend Privatedevices and PrivateNetwork in systemd
guidelines
.fpc 466
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/466
(needinfo, just package dep?)
#topic #468 Temporary modernizr packing exception for kimchi
.fpc 468
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/468
(needs info. don't want all containers to need static ids)
#topic #474 Allocating a soft static uid and gid 389 for dirsrv
.fpc 474
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/474
(needs policy)
#topic #475 Suggested Changes for Python Guidelines for F22
.fpc 475
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/475
(minor policy changes needed, speak to orionp)
#topic #478 Proposal: Package Guidelines: DevAssistant Assistant packages (DAP)
.fpc 478
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/478
(add examples for common libs.)
#topic #480 Packaging guidelines for consistent PKCS#11 usage
.fpc 480
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/480
(explain host-independent, and fix name)
#topic #481 static uids systemd-network, systemd-timesync, systemd-resolve
.fpc 481
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/481
= Ye Ancient tickets (zombie followups) =
#topic #126 bundling exception for scintilla
.fpc 126
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/126
#topic #202 Application for exemption from "No bundling" rule: Gargoyle
.fpc 202
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/202
#topic #221 Bundling exception request: numptyphysics and Box2D
.fpc 221
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/221
#topic #235 exception for bundling a library into uif2iso package
.fpc 235
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/235
#topic #304 asking for bundling exception for the package "rubygem-rdiscount"
.fpc 304
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/304
#topic #338 %doc and %_pkgdocdir duplicate files and cause conflicts
.fpc 338
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/338
#topic #381 Bundling exception for python-matplotlib fonts
.fpc 381
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/381
#topic #412 Please change the packaging guidelines to include packaging
policy regarding systemd timer units
.fpc 412
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/412
= Ye Ancient tickets (new) =
#topic #208 Please add policy regarding socket activated services
.fpc 208
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/208
#topic #209 Please define policy regarding instantiated application
services
.fpc 209
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/209
#topic #443 Requesting Bundling exception for Love (liblove sub package)
.fpc 443
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/443
= New business =
#topic #484 Minor PHP Guidelines update (for PSR-4)
.fpc 484
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/484
#topic #486 help2man
.fpc 486
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/486
#topic #488 [RFC] Please update Python_Eggs packaging guidelines
.fpc 488
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/488
#topic #489 Ruby guidelines: Updates for Minitest 5
.fpc 489
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/489
= Open Floor =
For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/12
If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fpc,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
the following meeting.
9 years, 3 months
Soft dependencies guidelines
by Miroslav Suchý
Hi,
rpm 4.12, which include soft dependencies landed in F21.
Are there plan to reflect this in our current Packaging Guidelines? Or we will wait till this feature will be recognized
by dnf, PackageKit and others?
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
9 years, 3 months
Re: [Fedora-packaging] Interesting blog on simplifying packaging for OS bootstrapping
by Vít Ondruch
Dne 2.1.2015 v 16:59 Jan Zeleny napsal(a):
> Dne Út 23. prosince 2014 09:57:31, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>> Dne 22.12.2014 v 19:18 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a):
>>>>>>>> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de> writes:
>>> RC> If we'd want to change something about this, rpm would likely have
>>> RC> to modified - I don't think this would be advisable.
>>>
>>> I was kind of hoping Panu or some other RPM dev would notice the thread
>>> and give a hint as to how painful it might be. I'm not entirely sure
>>> how to get their attention otherwise.
>> I'm adding jzeleny into CC. Hopefully he will delegate this question to
>> someone from RPM team, who could elaborate.
> Could you first be a bit more specific as to what exactly would you like rpm to
> do? I haven't seen any specific proposals in this thread. in the thread. As for
> minimizing the BRs, I believe the Base WG is the one you should talk to, as
> they have already done some work in that area.
>
> Thanks
> Jan
Unfortunately the most important idea was stripped from the previous
discussion and it was:
"It actually is the norm to have additional build-time-deps just to run
testsuites (aka. %check).".
So what I would like to see (and Ralf probably meant) is something like
"BuildRequires(check): foo" (there were times when RPM allowed this
syntax, although probably just by mistake). Or probably "CheckRequires:
foo" might be even better. In this case, if you run something like
"rpmbuild --disable-check -ba ....", it would skip the %check section
and hence you would not need the check requires.
The %check could be even automatically disabled during the bootstrap phase.
Vít
9 years, 3 months
Type switching to bugfix when there's an error on New Update page
by Dave Johansen
I'm not sure if this is the right place to bring up this issue, but if
there's ever an error on the New Update page, then the Type switches back
to bugfix regardless of what was selected. Sometimes I notice this, but
there have been a few times that I didn't and packages were marked as
bugfix when they really weren't.
I realize that this isn't too big of a deal, but I just wanted to pass the
info on to here and find out if there's somewhere more appropriate that I
should report the issue.
Thanks,
Dave
9 years, 3 months