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 _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
