Re: Injecting perl-devel and perl-generators build-requires

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

 



On 2016-06-29, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Petr Pisar wrote:
>> per Build Root Without Perl Fedora 25 change
>> <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Build_Root_Without_Perl>, I'm
>> ready to implement the most visible part of this change.
>
> That change completely fails to account for the unknown (probably very high) 
> number of packages that run Perl scripts at any point of their build 
> process.

Becuase it's impossible. At the and requiremnt to specify all build-time
dependencies has already existed before this removal attempt. So if it's
first time their maintainers responsibility. But I believe there will
not be more than few hunders of failures because of this.

> All the steps you documented to detect affected packages catch only 
> packages that actually have Perl-related output (because you scan the 
> RUNTIME dependencies for Perl module or libperl dependencies), which are 
> only the tip of the iceberg. I expect this change to break a huge number of 
> packages' build in very strange, hard to debug ways. It is likely that some 
> will even silently build with some important functionality removed, because 
> Perl was not available to build some generated file or test for some system 
> properties.
>
> I also expect that a very high percentage of the packages will need a BR 
> perl (if not perl-generators or even perl-devel), making any buildroot size 
> savings moot, and actually SLOWING DOWN mock builds because perl will no 
> longer be included in the root cache.
>
> IMHO, any approval you obtained for this feature needs to be revisited, 
> because you failed to accurately describe the impact.
>
Yes, it's one big IMHO. Would be great if you back "the unknown number",
"probably very high", "the tip of the iceberg", "huge number", "very
high percentage" with real numbers.  Otherwise it's only your
impression.

In my opinion, the amount of packages that build-require perl
transitively is less than half, so the net result will be a speed-up.

We could download root.logs from Koji and grep them for "Package
perl-4:\S* is already installed, skipping". That should provide some
data.

But I don't have direct access to Koji storage. Downloading them would
be too slow. I think I can ack Copr people to do it in Copr. It's not
Koji, but it could have representative data.

-- Petr
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux