packaging December 2020

packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org

9 participants
8 discussions

RPM-level auto release and changelog bumping - Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal
by Ben Cotton 13 Aug '22

13 Aug '22

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/rpm_level_auto_release_and_changelog… == Summary == redhat-rpm-config will be updated so users of the auto framework get automated release and changelog bumping. == Owner == * Name: [[User:nim| Nicolas Mailhot]] * Email: <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net> == Detailed Description == This is a system-wide change because all packages build with redhat-rpm-config, but it only concerns packages that opted to use this part of redhat-rpm-config (auto framework). The change will make those packages auto-bump and auto-changelog at the rpm level, in an infrastructure-independent way. == Benefit to Fedora == Autobumping removes a huge packager shore and makes timestamping in changelogs more reliable. == Scope == * Proposal owners: The feature is coded and works at the rpm level. Unfortunately, mock filters away the srpms containing the bump state, so it does not work in upper layers. * Other developers: The feature requires buy-in by mock developers (and probably koji developers) to lift the restrictions that block it above the rpm level. Also, it requires a mechanism to pass the user name and email that will be used in bumped changelogs (defining two variables in ~/.rpmmacros is sufficient at rpm level) * Mock issue: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/599 * Release engineering: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9567 * Policies and guidelines: maybe eventually if things work out on the technical level * FPC issue: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/998 * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == This is a pure build tooling update, it changes how things are built not what is built. == How To Test == A redhat-rpm-config packages with the changes and some example packages are available in https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/refactoring-forge-patches-auto-… Since the mock/copr layer is currently blocking the feature, you need to install the redhat-rpm-config and forge macro packages available in this repo locally. Afterwards you can take any of the example packages in the repo and rebuild them with rpmbuild -ba to your heart content, and see the releases bump and the changelogs being updated accordingly. To get beautiful changelogs, you also need to add <pre> %buildsys_name Your name %buildsys_email Your email </pre> in ~/.rpmmacros == User Experience == N/A Packager experience change only == Dependencies == The change is a spin-off of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Patches_in_Forge_macros_-_Auto_macro… Therefore, it depends on the success of that other change and will probably need rebasing if the code in this other change evolves during the redhat-rpm-config merge. It also depends on mock / copr/ koji buy-in and changes, that may add their own requirements. == Contingency Plan == There is no contingency plan because the change will happen or not at all. == Documentation == There is as much documentation as the average redhat-rpm-config change (ie comments in the macro files themselves) == Release Notes == N/A Packager productivity change only -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

12 23

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2019-08-15 16:00 UTC)
by James Antill 18 Jul '21

18 Jul '21

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2019-08-15 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): ================= Day: Thursday ================== 2019-08-15 09:00 PDT US/Pacific 2019-08-15 12:00 EDT --> US/Eastern <-- 2019-08-15 16:00 UTC UTC 2019-08-15 17:00 BST Europe/London 2019-08-15 18:00 CEST Europe/Berlin 2019-08-15 18:00 CEST Europe/Paris 2019-08-15 21:30 IST Asia/Calcutta ---------------- New Day: Friday ----------------- 2019-08-16 00:00 HKT Asia/Hong_Kong 2019-08-16 00:00 +08 Asia/Singapore 2019-08-16 01:00 JST Asia/Tokyo 2019-08-16 02:00 AEST Australia/Brisbane Links to all tickets below can be found at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting = Followups = #topic #902 Cleanup & enhance spec files .fpc 902 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/902 #topic #904 Caret versioning .fpc 904 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/904 #topic #907 Which %__foo macros for executables are acceptable? .fpc 907 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/907 #topic #909 Suggest that linting/measuring-coverage is not for %check .fpc 909 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/909 #topic #914 Automatic R runtime dependencies .fpc 914 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/914 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The report of the agenda items can be found at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can: * Reply to this e-mail * File a new ticket at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee * E-mail me directly * 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.

3 2

Odd problem with obsoletes in EPEL8
by Martin Jackson 18 Jul '21

18 Jul '21

Hello, I'm having a problem I don't understand how to fix, and I would appreciate some guidance. I'm maintaining nagios-plugins, which bundles a number of different "check" plugins and has some metapackages that include different subsets of those check plugins. In the EL 8.2 release cycle, one of the dependencies of one of those plugins was moved from EPEL into EL proper, which broke new installs of that plugin and the -all metapackage. A user filed a bug, so as a temporary workaround, I stopped building the plugin package with that dependency (nagios-plugins-ssl_validity, and had that version (nagios-plugins-2.3.3-3) obsolete the ssl_validity plugin, since leaving it around caused it to want to keep the base package in conflict with other packages that were upgrading. Now that CentOS 8.2 is released, and the dependency is available, I've issued an update (https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-70bcfe5382) that builds ssl_validity again, and also adds it back to the -all subpackage. I can upgrade it sucessfully (which installs the ssl_validity plugin again, as expected), but subsequent calls to dnf upgrade give this error: Obsoleting Packages nagios-plugins.x86_64 2.3.3-3.el8 epel nagios-plugins-ssl_validity.x86_64 2.3.3-4.el8 @epel-testing nagios-plugins 2.3.3-3 is not installed anymore, and there are no explicit Obsoletes: in the ssl_validity package. I'm not sure what needs to be done here, but whatever it is I'm willing to make the change. Also wondering if this is expected behavior. Thanks, Marty

2 1

CMake out-of-source builds
by Brad Bell 27 Dec '20

27 Dec '20

On the web page https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds the following text appears: Targeted release: Fedora 33 I am testing output of source builds on Fedora 33 using the following command in a SPEC directory rpmbuild -ba <package>.spec where <package> is my package name. When I run rpmbuild, the soruce code gets upacked in the directory BUILD/<package>-<version> where <version> is the package version, so I am trying the 'out of source build' with the following in the spec file: %cmake -S <package>-version -B cmake_dir .. CMake appears to run correction and output its files in BUILD/cmake_dir. One problem I am having is that I seem to need to put 'cd cmake_dir' directly after the '%cmake' command or my make command fails ? I also seem to have to put 'cd cmake_dir' other places ? Another problem I am having is that an include sub-directory of the source directory <package>-version needs to be installed while the rest of the installed files are in the build directory cmake_dir. I am not sure how to indicate this in the %files section of the spec file ?

1 0

Forgotten review request
by Andy Mender 05 Dec '20

05 Dec '20

Hello fellow Fedorians, I'm a reviewer on this review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727506 The request was submitted last year, but then somehow forgotten by the submitter. I still carried out the review as usual and would like to push this forward. What is the procedure for the re-assigning of a review request to the reviewer? How do I then nominate a new reviewer for the request? Cheers, Andy

2 1

packaging status for py_provides_macro and ldconfig_scriptlets
by Sérgio Basto 05 Dec '20

05 Dec '20

Hi, Can we remove %ldconfig_scriptlets and %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{srcname}} from the specs ? The new documentation of packaging guidelines is very cool [1], I'd like to suggest a section for scriptlets that can be removed fro spec files and documentation since when, also if, inform how to deal with epel 7 and 8 version, even better . Thank you. [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ -- Sérgio M. B.

3 3

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2020-12-03 17:00 UTC)
by James Antill 02 Dec '20

02 Dec '20

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2020-12-03 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): ================= Day: Thursday ================== 2020-12-03 09:00 PST US/Pacific 2020-12-03 12:00 EST --> US/Eastern <-- 2020-12-03 17:00 GMT Europe/London 2020-12-03 17:00 UTC UTC 2020-12-03 18:00 CET Europe/Berlin 2020-12-03 18:00 CET Europe/Paris 2020-12-03 22:30 IST Asia/Calcutta ---------------- New Day: Friday ----------------- 2020-12-04 01:00 HKT Asia/Hong_Kong 2020-12-04 01:00 +08 Asia/Singapore 2020-12-04 02:00 JST Asia/Tokyo 2020-12-04 03:00 AEST Australia/Brisbane Links to all tickets below can be found at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting = Followup Actions = #topic #pr-954 * King_InuYasha talk to copr to get config. turned on * tibbs talk to releng to get config. turned on #topic #pr-814 * mhroncok talk to authors again, having a working example might help a lot #topic Open Floor * decathorpe look through non-meeting tickets, see if any are stuck/need to be discussed = Followup Issues = #topic #907 Which %__foo macros for executables are acceptable? .fpc 907 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/907 = Followup Pull Requests = #topic #pr-814 Add SELinux Independent Policy Guidelines. https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/814 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The report of the agenda items can be found at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can: * Reply to this e-mail * File a new ticket at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee * E-mail me directly * 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.

1 0

packaging an alternate dictionary for cracklibs?
by Matthew Miller 02 Dec '20

02 Dec '20

The cracklibs-dict package is ... quite ... comprehensive. It weighs in at almost 10MB on disk. Modern password guidance emphasizes length rather than complicated checks, and this 10MB payload is increasingly irrelevant. I'd like to provide an alternative, using a list of the 10,000 most common passwords found in password breeches. This compresses down to about 1k, so it's significant space savings, and may result in less user frustration while still giving some real protection against the worst choices -- and meeting security checklist items like "passwords checked against a dictionary". The problem is that cracklib seems to have a compile-time option for where to find its dictionary. cracklib-dicts is already a subpackage, and a cracklib-10k-worst or something alternative package could just be a drop-in replacement... except of course it would conflict. Is this an okay use of Conflicts? If not, what _should_ I do? -- Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader

3 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

packaging December 2020