Hi all,
Today I encountered another LLVM-specific bug that affects at least one Rust package and causes non-working code to be produced, which prompted this question:
Why are stable releases not getting bugfix releases of LLVM?
Fedora 35 is stuck at LLVM 13.0.0, while 13.0.1 has been released. Fedora 36 is stuck at LLVM 14.0.0, while 14.0.1 through 14.0.6 have been released. Even Rawhide is at LLVM 14.0.5, but has not been updated to 14.0.6 yet (released over 3 weeks ago).
However, the llvm13 compat package that exists on Fedora 36+ *has* been updated to version 13.0.1, so I'm not sure why this update wasn't also pushed to Fedora 35, where LLVM 13 is the default, and would benefit much more from bugfixes provided by 13.0.1.
Given that llvm and the whole llvm ecosystem (clang, lld, rustc, ghc on some architectures, mesa/llvmpipe) are an important part of our stack, it seems bad that stable releases are missing out on several bugfix updates for those critical packages.
I appreciate that updating ~a dozen packages for new LLVM point releases is work, but I don't think having outdated LLVM components on stable releases of Fedora is a good idea, either.
What can we do to improve this situation?
Fabio
Hi,
Today I encountered another LLVM-specific bug that affects at least one Rust package and causes non-working code to be produced, which prompted this question:
Why are stable releases not getting bugfix releases of LLVM?
Fedora 35 is stuck at LLVM 13.0.0, while 13.0.1 has been released. Fedora 36 is stuck at LLVM 14.0.0, while 14.0.1 through 14.0.6 have been released. Even Rawhide is at LLVM 14.0.5, but has not been updated to 14.0.6 yet (released over 3 weeks ago).
However, the llvm13 compat package that exists on Fedora 36+ *has* been updated to version 13.0.1, so I'm not sure why this update wasn't also pushed to Fedora 35, where LLVM 13 is the default, and would benefit much more from bugfixes provided by 13.0.1.
Given that llvm and the whole llvm ecosystem (clang, lld, rustc, ghc on some architectures, mesa/llvmpipe) are an important part of our stack, it seems bad that stable releases are missing out on several bugfix updates for those critical packages.
I appreciate that updating ~a dozen packages for new LLVM point releases is work, but I don't think having outdated LLVM components on stable releases of Fedora is a good idea, either.
What can we do to improve this situation?
Have you reached out to the maintainer(s)? In the past they seem to have been quite effective at keeping things up to date AFAIA so maybe they've got stuff going on of late, PTO, have other priorities or something else.
You don't mention if you've had a discussion with the maintainer(s), whether they replied, or even cc:ed them on this mail. I personally would tend to do that before mailing a list, but then maybe you have and you didn't mention it here.
Peter
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:26 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Today I encountered another LLVM-specific bug that affects at least one Rust package and causes non-working code to be produced, which prompted this question:
Why are stable releases not getting bugfix releases of LLVM?
Fedora 35 is stuck at LLVM 13.0.0, while 13.0.1 has been released. Fedora 36 is stuck at LLVM 14.0.0, while 14.0.1 through 14.0.6 have been released. Even Rawhide is at LLVM 14.0.5, but has not been updated to 14.0.6 yet (released over 3 weeks ago).
However, the llvm13 compat package that exists on Fedora 36+ *has* been updated to version 13.0.1, so I'm not sure why this update wasn't also pushed to Fedora 35, where LLVM 13 is the default, and would benefit much more from bugfixes provided by 13.0.1.
Given that llvm and the whole llvm ecosystem (clang, lld, rustc, ghc on some architectures, mesa/llvmpipe) are an important part of our stack, it seems bad that stable releases are missing out on several bugfix updates for those critical packages.
I appreciate that updating ~a dozen packages for new LLVM point releases is work, but I don't think having outdated LLVM components on stable releases of Fedora is a good idea, either.
What can we do to improve this situation?
Have you reached out to the maintainer(s)? In the past they seem to have been quite effective at keeping things up to date AFAIA so maybe they've got stuff going on of late, PTO, have other priorities or something else.
You don't mention if you've had a discussion with the maintainer(s), whether they replied, or even cc:ed them on this mail. I personally would tend to do that before mailing a list, but then maybe you have and you didn't mention it here.
I have filed multiple bugs against llvm (or rust, which were then reassigned to llvm) and llvm compat packages over the past 1-2 years, and they've been pretty much ignored. Also, given that rawhide *is* up-to-date with LLVM bugfix releases until about three weeks ago, but the llvm packages on f36 and f35 weren't touched since 4 months (f36) and f35 (9 months) ago, respectively, so I don't think PTO can be a problem here. Or, if it is, then we'd need to have a serious talk about adding backup maintainers to those packages ...
Fabio
On 7/18/22 06:33, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:26 PM Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Today I encountered another LLVM-specific bug that affects at least one Rust package and causes non-working code to be produced, which prompted this question:
Why are stable releases not getting bugfix releases of LLVM?
Fedora 35 is stuck at LLVM 13.0.0, while 13.0.1 has been released. Fedora 36 is stuck at LLVM 14.0.0, while 14.0.1 through 14.0.6 have been released. Even Rawhide is at LLVM 14.0.5, but has not been updated to 14.0.6 yet (released over 3 weeks ago).
However, the llvm13 compat package that exists on Fedora 36+ *has* been updated to version 13.0.1, so I'm not sure why this update wasn't also pushed to Fedora 35, where LLVM 13 is the default, and would benefit much more from bugfixes provided by 13.0.1.
Given that llvm and the whole llvm ecosystem (clang, lld, rustc, ghc on some architectures, mesa/llvmpipe) are an important part of our stack, it seems bad that stable releases are missing out on several bugfix updates for those critical packages.
I appreciate that updating ~a dozen packages for new LLVM point releases is work, but I don't think having outdated LLVM components on stable releases of Fedora is a good idea, either.
What can we do to improve this situation?
Have you reached out to the maintainer(s)? In the past they seem to have been quite effective at keeping things up to date AFAIA so maybe they've got stuff going on of late, PTO, have other priorities or something else.
You don't mention if you've had a discussion with the maintainer(s), whether they replied, or even cc:ed them on this mail. I personally would tend to do that before mailing a list, but then maybe you have and you didn't mention it here.
I have filed multiple bugs against llvm (or rust, which were then reassigned to llvm) and llvm compat packages over the past 1-2 years, and they've been pretty much ignored.
Can you send me links to these bugs.
Also, given that rawhide *is* up-to-date with LLVM bugfix releases until about three weeks ago, but the llvm packages on f36 and f35 weren't touched since 4 months (f36) and f35 (9 months) ago, respectively, so I don't think PTO can be a problem here. Or, if it is, then we'd need to have a serious talk about adding backup maintainers to those packages ...
We've been training up more people on LLVM packaging so we should be able to cover the stable release of Fedora better in the future. I'm sorry that the stable releases have been falling behind, we'll work on getting them back up to date.
-Tom
Fabio _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:43 PM Tom Stellard tstellar@redhat.com wrote:
On 7/18/22 06:33, Fabio Valentini wrote:
I have filed multiple bugs against llvm (or rust, which were then reassigned to llvm) and llvm compat packages over the past 1-2 years, and they've been pretty much ignored.
Can you send me links to these bugs.
The current ones are (some rust bugs are already reassigned to llvm, some weren't yet, but probably should be):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001328 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2020861 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041942 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045116 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086106
There have been previous ones for F34 that were closed at EOL without resolution:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2020861 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1883457
And these are only the ones I could find quickly, I'm pretty sure there are a few more.
Also, given that rawhide *is* up-to-date with LLVM bugfix releases until about three weeks ago, but the llvm packages on f36 and f35 weren't touched since 4 months (f36) and f35 (9 months) ago, respectively, so I don't think PTO can be a problem here. Or, if it is, then we'd need to have a serious talk about adding backup maintainers to those packages ...
We've been training up more people on LLVM packaging so we should be able to cover the stable release of Fedora better in the future. I'm sorry that the stable releases have been falling behind, we'll work on getting them back up to date.
That sounds great, thank you for trying to improve the situation.
Fabio
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:43 PM Tom Stellard tstellar@redhat.com wrote:
We've been training up more people on LLVM packaging so we should be able to cover the stable release of Fedora better in the future. I'm sorry that the stable releases have been falling behind, we'll work on getting them back up to date.
I see an update for llvm 13.0.1 has been pushed to Fedora 35, thank you for that! Has there been progress in getting llvm updated to 14.0.5 on F36? Also, the latest bugfix release (14.0.6) has now been out for 2 months, would it be possible to get that update for Fedora soon-ish, as well?
Thank you for your work, Fabio
On 8/18/22 08:05, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:43 PM Tom Stellard tstellar@redhat.com wrote:
We've been training up more people on LLVM packaging so we should be able to cover the stable release of Fedora better in the future. I'm sorry that the stable releases have been falling behind, we'll work on getting them back up to date.
I see an update for llvm 13.0.1 has been pushed to Fedora 35, thank you for that! Has there been progress in getting llvm updated to 14.0.5 on F36? Also, the latest bugfix release (14.0.6) has now been out for 2 months, would it be possible to get that update for Fedora soon-ish, as well?
I'm working on the 14.0.5 update for F36 right now. The 14.0.6 release is going to have to wait until after 15.0.0 lands in F37 and rawhide, because I don't think it's worth doing the 14.0.6 update there, since 15.0.0 is so close.
14.0.6 only has a small fix that probably won't affect most Fedora users, so I think 14.0.5 should be fine for now.
-Tom
Thank you for your work, Fabio
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 5:23 PM Tom Stellard tstellar@redhat.com wrote:
I'm working on the 14.0.5 update for F36 right now. The 14.0.6 release is going to have to wait until after 15.0.0 lands in F37 and rawhide, because I don't think it's worth doing the 14.0.6 update there, since 15.0.0 is so close.
Awesome, thanks for the update!
14.0.6 only has a small fix that probably won't affect most Fedora users, so I think 14.0.5 should be fine for now.
Sounds good to me :)
Thanks again, Fabio
On 8/18/22 15:32, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 5:23 PM Tom Stellard tstellar@redhat.com wrote:
I'm working on the 14.0.5 update for F36 right now. The 14.0.6 release is going to have to wait until after 15.0.0 lands in F37 and rawhide, because I don't think it's worth doing the 14.0.6 update there, since 15.0.0 is so close.
Awesome, thanks for the update!
Here is the Bodhi update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eecc713e20
14.0.6 only has a small fix that probably won't affect most Fedora users, so I think 14.0.5 should be fine for now.
Sounds good to me :)
Thanks again, Fabio _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Fabio Valentini -
Peter Robinson -
Tom Stellard