Re: Fedora kernel workflow feedback

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Lo!

Am 20.04.20 um 16:41 schrieb Jeremy Cline:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:06:02PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Am 17.04.20 um 20:55 schrieb Don Zickus:
> […]
>>> Is there any other large concern with the new workflow?
>> The more I think about this the more I dislike that we are not using
>> official, pristine tarballs anymore. This "Source0 is a tarball
>> generated from a git tree maintained outside of the Fedora infra and
>> patched with buildscripts" IMHO violates the intention of the SourceURL
>> part of the Fedora Packaging Guidelines that was put in place for good
>> reasons (by both red hat and community contributors):
>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/
>
> It sounds like maybe there's confusion about what the new tarball
> contains.

Yes, there…

> The tarballs that are generated and checked into dist-git contain no
> Fedora modifications and are directly from a commit or tag Linus's git
> tree generated with git-archive[0].

…indeed was. I apologize for getting this wrong. Just one suggestion in
that case:

> The only thing that changed is
> before we took the latest tagged release, then applied an rc patch from
> upstream if available, then the snapshot from that week's development as
> a patch generated on the maintainer's machine, then applied
> Fedora-specific patches. Now we just git-archive Linus's master branch
> for the day.

Can't we make that clearer by using something like this?

Source0:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/snapshot/linux-ae83d0b416db002fe95601e7f97f64b59514d936.tar.gz

That was for 5.7-rc2 and makes it obvious where I can download this from
if I do not trust the contents of the SRPM. And/or a comment right
before the Source0 line that explains the situation for ordinary people
might be good enough (yes, there is one, but it's hard to understand).

> We can download the tarball (created by git-archive on a signed tag)
> from kernel.org instead of running git-archive on a signed tag
> ourselves if that will really help people sleep at night, but we'll
> still be slapping unsigned snapshots on top of that so it's not clear to
> me that we'll be gaining much.

Yeah, you definitely have a point for rawhide. But once this scheme is
used for stable releases it's a bit different, as there the base will
normally have signed tag.

CU, knurd
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora General Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Archive]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [USB]     [Asterisk PBX]

  Powered by Linux