devel October 2018

devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

213 participants
267 discussions

Nonresponsive maintainer: salimma
by Miro Hrončok 27 May '19

27 May '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1589077 Does anyone know how to contact the maintainer? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

4 4

Attention Gmail users, please turn off HTML mail
by Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 15 Apr '19

15 Apr '19

Dear developers, sorry for a slightly off-topic post, but I've noticed that a significant number of posters is sending HTML e-mail to this list (not to mention top-replying), which generates unnecessary network traffic. Some people pay for every bit downloaded, so they're paying for the same information twice, because the e-mails are sent with multipart/alternative format, which contains BOTH text/plain and text/html. One thing I noticed those senders have in common is that they use Gmail. So, a plea to Gmail users: please stop sending HTML e-mail to Fedora mailing lists. Regards, Dominik (who still reads e-mail in text mode in a terminal) -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan

14 15

Blocking criteria proposal for F30+: Printing
by Stephen Gallagher 01 Apr '19

01 Apr '19

There was a bug[1] filed recently that indicated that printing was broken on certain printers. As a result of that discussion, it became apparent that there was no criteria for printing to work at all, which seems like an oversight. I discussed this briefly with Matthias Clasen this morning and he agreed that this should be treated as blocking for Workstation. I'd like to propose that we add the following criteria to Beta for Fedora 30+: * Printing must work on at least one printer available to Fedora QA. "Work" is defined as the output from the device matching a preview shown on the GNOME print preview display. (Note that differences in color reproduction are not considered "non-working".) and this to Final for Fedora 30+: * Printing must work on at least one printer using each of the following drivers: (I don't know which ones to specify here, but we ought to try to figure out a cross-section that covers a large swath of our expected user base). [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628255

9 22

Proposal: Abandon v8 package
by Tom Callaway 07 Mar '19

07 Mar '19

Background: I made the original v8 Fedora package many moons ago, when I was more optimistic about the possibility of separating the useful components inside of chromium. Since that point, it has become clear that while v8 is useful software, the following facts are also true: 1. The v8 upstream is entirely disinterested in the concept of maintaining any sort of ABI/API consistency between releases. 2. The v8 that is used in chromium is not necessarily compatible with the upstream v8, as they have a history of picking and choosing code changes (and even applying chromium specific changes locally). 3. Virtually all consumers of v8 (including chromium) take a git checkout (not a specific one, just whatever they decided to code to) and use that revision, often creating a local fork of v8 from that revision, as they are either unwilling or unable to track v8 upstream. 4. Since v8 has no concept of a "stable" release that I can see, they simply do security fixes to the master branch, which, combined with the code changing violently, makes it very difficult to backport security fixes. This means that other than plv8 (which is currently unable to build against the current v8 package in Fedora), I do not see any consumers of the Fedora v8 package (chromium has long since abandoned any possibility of using it). It does contain a "d8" binary, which is a javascript CLI debugger, but it is not clear to me that this is widely used, or that the benefit of its inclusion in Fedora outweighs the pain of maintaining this package. Thus, I propose that the v8 package be abandoned/orphaned/taken to the farm upstate to run and play with the other dogs. If you disagree, or are crazy enough to want to take it over, speak now. ~tom P.S. I'll still maintain v8-314 as best I can, since there are actually users of that. The irony of that really ancient version being considered stable (and thus, used by other software) as a result of Fedora sticking on that version of v8 for so many releases is not lost on me.

4 7

F29 System Wide Change: OpenLDAP without Non-threaded Libraries
by Jan Kurik 04 Mar '19

04 Mar '19

= Proposed System Wide Change: OpenLDAP without Non-threaded Libraries = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenLDAPwithoutNonthreadedLibraries Owner(s): * Matus Honek <mhonek at redhat dot com> OpenLDAP will not ship non-threaded version of libldap. Instead, libldap will be built with the same threading support as libldap_r. == Detailed description == After this change the non-threaded version of libldap will not be shipped any more. Instead, this library will rather be built the same way as the threaded libldap_r. This has been previously discussed in Bugzilla [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370065] and other distributions where this change already happened. Upstream still supports non-threaded version of their library as it might be used on processors where threads are not supported. However, when these two versions happen to be loaded at the same time (as discussed about Curl in the Bugzilla) symbol names overlap which may result in unpredictable behaviour. Immediate solution would be to symlink libldap to libldap_r, however SONAME of the library would be the same, hence breaking dependencies of other packages. For that reason the solution hereby proposed should be the most convenient one. == Scope == * Proposal owners: update SPEC file so that non-threaded libldap is replaced with threaded one. * Other developers: None. Issues should not occur. * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7253] ** List of deliverables: N/A * Policies and guidelines: None. * Trademark approval: (not needed for this Change) -- Jan Kuřík JBoss EAP Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

5 9

F29 System Wide Change: Remove Excessive Linking
by Jan Kurik 18 Feb '19

18 Feb '19

Note from Change Wrangler: This Change Proposal requires mass rebuild. However, two weeks ago (June 19th), we have already passed the deadline for Change proposals requiring mass rebuild. I will leave the decision whether this Change proposal is accepted or not to RelEng and FESCo teams. = Proposed System Wide Change: Remove Excessive Linking = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RemoveExcessiveLinking Owner(s): * Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain at fedoraproject dot org> * Neal Gompa <ngompa13 at gmail dot com> Pass "--as-needed" flag the linker through default system-wide LDFLAGS. == Detailed description == The flag ("--as-needed") tells the linker to link in the produced binary only the libraries containing symbols actually used by the binary itself. This binary can be either a final executale or another library. The use of the "--as-needed" flag allows the linker to avoid linking extra libraries in a binary. This not only improves startup times (as the loader does not have to load all the libraries for every step) but might avoid the full initialization of big frameworks. == Scope == * Proposal owners: Add "-Wl,--as-needed" into RPM_LD_FLAGS (in redhat-rpm-config). * Other developers: Nothing should break, but immediate work-around would be to disable this flag (will be provided in redhat-rpm-config) and fix real issue later. * Release engineering: #7604 [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7604] (mass rebuild is desired after this change). ** List of deliverables: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Policies and guidelines: Add information how to turn it off (TODO link to FPC ticket). * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) -- Jan Kuřík JBoss EAP Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

11 17

Orphan/retire gogoc
by J. Randall Owens 17 Feb '19

17 Feb '19

Hello, gogoc is dead to the world upstream (the gogo6.com site is now a nutritional supplement pusher!), and without gogo6's servers, gogoc is fairly useless. It's still possible it could be used to TSP tunnel through one's own servers to get IPv6, but as far as I know, there aren't any more tunnel services out there that use it. So, if someone would find it worthwhile to keep it around for their own tunnelling needs, feel free to pick it up. Otherwise, I'll retire it in two weeks. -- J. Randall Owens | http://www.GhiaPet.net/

3 2

Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Mass Python 2 Package Removal
by Ben Cotton 17 Feb '19

17 Feb '19

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal == Summary == (Sub-)packages only providing python2 importable modules without additional functionality will be removed from Fedora unless some other package(s) depends on them. Python 2 will be deprecated in Fedora. Packagers can mark any other Python 2 packages as deprecated as well. == Owner == * Miro Hrončok (Churchyard) * Petr Viktorin (Pviktori) * Charalampos Stratakis (Cstratak) * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (Zbyszek) * Igor Gantenko (Ignatenkobrain) * Neal Gompa (Ngompa) == Detailed Description == Python 2 reaches End of Life on 2020-01-01. Its current maintainers would like to orphan it before that date, and so far no one else has stepped up to maintain Python 2 (with the full ecosystem) past 2020. Since thousands of packages still depend on python2, we need a more careful approach than normal orphaning. Some of those packages are abandoned and/or the Python 2 version is unnecessary. Others are useful and just need more time to port to Python 3. Hence we set up criteria for python2 packages that can remain in the distribution and we remove everything else. This should allow us to keep python2 for limited use, not break everything, but should also send a strong message that it is no longer a first class citizen, and filter packages we need to focus Python 3 porting efforts on. (Sub-)packages that only provide a python2 importable module, and are not required for other packages, will be removed. Examples of situations where a (sub-)package does not provide only the importable module: * A package also provides an application, mostly likely in /usr/bin, /usr/libexec... ** (Note that according to current guidelines, if the Python 3 version of a package provides the same functionality, the Python 3 package should provide the application.) ** (In certain situations the provided application is only useful to boostrap or manage projects using the module. Such applications don't count.) * A package provides a plugin for another application, most likely trough a setuptools entrypoint interface or some custom location on disk. Our process will be: * File bugs for all packages that look like they only provide a Python 2 importable module. (This includes those needed by other packages we plan to remove.) * Leave at least a week for packagers to respond to the bugs. * If the packager approves or there is no response for a week, we will remove the package. There are currently ~3000 source packages that generate python2 dependent RPMs. Automation is being created to be able to provide us a rough list of packages to remove. === Packages to remove === The list is at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal/List not to disturb the reading experience of this page. Packagers can block some packages from removal by responding on Bugzilla and providing reasons. If no general consensus is reached, FESCo will decide (as Python SIG does not have a formal process for such decisions). We'll also actively try to remove unused or optional dependencies to reduce the number of packages that need to be kept because other packages depend on them. As dependencies evolve over time, we will regularly repeat this proces on rawhide from now on even on future releases. Packagers are strongly encouraged to help port their applications to Python 3. Removing old Python 2 only applications from Fedora is also encouraged, especially if the upstream is dead. Python SIG is available to help with porting. Packaging guidelines will be updated to reflect that packaging for Python 3 only is the default. Instructions for Python 2 and dual-support will be moved to the Appendix. Python 2 will be marked deprecated (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Deprecating_Packages). Any package that only provides a Python 2 importable module may be marked as deprecated as well if the maintainer(s) want to. == Benefit to Fedora == A giant pile of unneeded software running on a legacy interperter will be removed from Fedora before the interpreter stops being supported upstream. While we would very much like to remove Python 2 entirely, this way we are not breaking Fedora, and we can accomodate some exceptions. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Provide a list of packages to remove ** Collect feedback from affected packagers ** Retire the python2 only packages ** Remove python2 subpackages from dual-python packages * Other developers: ** Ask for packages to be removed from the list if needed (with reasons). ** Remove python2 subpackages from dual-python packages (not needed, but helpful) ** Optionaly mark remainign python2 packages deprecated * Policies and guidelines: ** Python packaging guidelines will be changed to only describe Python 3 ** Python 2 and dual-support packaging will be moved to the appendix ** Only packages providing additional features different than importable modules will be allowed to be added in Fedora (with exception for dependenecies of other packages) ** Python 2 will be marked deprecated https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Deprecating_Packages * Trademark approval: not needed for this Change == Upgrade/compatibility impact == Packages removed form Fedora repos will remain on the installed OS until explicitly removed by the user or obsoleted by the packagers. We'll only obsolete packages that would break upgrade (from fedora-obsolete-packages). == How To Test == Any program written in Python and any program that has Python plugins could potentially be influenced by this change. Testing is different for software that is still using Python 2 and for software that has been switched to Python 3. For any ''python2'' programs, make sure those programs are still functional after the package removal. Since various packages that are no longer built will not be removed from an existing system, just upgrading and checking packages is not enough. Either a new installation should be used, or after a branching point, any packages which haven't been rebuilt for F30, so any packages with .fc29 or lower release suffix should be removed from the system before testing. For the ''python3'' programs, install all upgrades and check if the software works. Upgrade failures because of missing dependencies should be treated as bugs. Any removed python2 subpackages which break upgrades need to be added to Obsoletes in fedora-obsolete-packages. == User Experience == There will be less Python 2 RPMs in Fedora repos. Users are encouraged to switch to Python 3 and/or use Python 2 virtual environments and pip for development. == Dependencies == Ideally, all programs that use python2 would be switched to use python3. Although we don't expect everything to be switched over, as much as possible should be, so that the set of remaining python2 subpackages is as small as possible. == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: ** If for some reason not everything is removed, nothing happens, it can be removed later. If for some reason something breaks, some packages can be unretired or restored. ** If someone steps up to maintain Python 2 (including the full ecosystem of packages now in Fedora), they can decide to discontinue removing packages, revert the Change, or come up with another plan. (Note that in this case, current maintainers will most likely orphan many fundamental python2 packages.) == Documentation == This page is the main documentation. Also see: https://pythonclock.org/ -- Ben Cotton Fedora Program Manager TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

4 4

Intel's Clear Linux optimizations
by František Zatloukal 08 Feb '19

08 Feb '19

Hi, Phoronix recently release article[1] about Intel's Clear Linux with some cool graphs showing nice performance gain compared to Xubuntu. I didn't have time to dig in and look how it's performing against Fedora, but I'd assume Fedora can be compared to Xubuntu in terms of compiler settings. I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel, ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory usage and so on. What do you think? [1] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-clr-opengl&num=1 -- Best regards / S pozdravem, František Zatloukal Project Coordinator Red Hat

15 50

Installation image layout
by Marek Marczykowski-Górecki 16 Jan '19

16 Jan '19

Hi all! I'm new on this list. I work on Qubes OS, where Fedora is used as a base distribution. While trying to build the installation image in reproducible manner[1], I found the current installation image have unusual layout. Quoting dracut.cmdline manual page: squashfs.img | Squashfs from LiveCD .iso downloaded via network !(mount) /LiveOS |- rootfs.img | Filesystem image to mount read-only !(mount) /bin | Live filesystem /boot | /dev | ... | This rootfs.img layer makes the image build very much unreproducible. Why is it even there? Bare squashfs.img layer should be enough. Then, mount overlayfs over it (I see there is even some partial support for it in dmsquash-live). Most other Live systems I've seen use just squashfs + overlayfs (or aufs if kernel is older), so it's commonly tested configuration. I *guess* it's there for historical reason, from before aufs/overlayfs being available. Is there any other reason for that? If there is no other reason, I propose to drop this and have installer/live filesystem directly in squashfs.img. This have multiple benefits: - it's much easier to make the image build process reproducible (see below) - less complexity, both in the build and in the boot (the whole dmsquash-live dracut module can be replaced with <20 line function[2] - smaller initramfs (which is extremely important if needed to be included in efiboot.img, which can't be larger than 32MB) - slightly faster boot time (device-mapper is slow) What do you think? As for the reproducibility, I've made changes to lorax (including dropping rootfs.img layer), anaconda, pungi and createrepo and this all allows to build bit-by-bit identical image, given the same input (rpm packages, pungi configuration, $SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH variable[3]). Well, almost - there is an issue with efiboot.img, but I already have a solution, just not pushed it yet. You can find all the pull requests collected here: https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-installer-qubes-os/pull/26 I'll work further to make the changes merged upstream. [1] https://reproducible-builds.org/ [2] https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-installer-qubes-os/pull/26/commits/332be8e… [3] https://reproducible-builds.org/specs/source-date-epoch/ -- Best Regards, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki Invisible Things Lab A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

9 19

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel October 2018