Re: F29 System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot

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

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 14:27 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:56:32PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> > Proposed System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_GCC_from_BuildRoot
> > 
> > 
> > Owner(s):
> >   * Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain at fedoraproject dot org>
> > 
> > 
> > Removing gcc and gcc-c++ from default buildroot in Koji and mock.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > == Detailed description ==
> > Since beginning of Fedora, gcc (and gcc-c++) are installed in every
> > buildroot. Times have changed and nowadays many of packages are not
> > written in C/C++, they are written in Python, Ruby, Node.js, Go, Rust,
> > OCaml, Perl and so on so they don't need to have C/C++ compiler.
> > Installing gcc and gcc-c++ takes time so if we remove it, we can
> > improve build times for many of the packages.
> > 
> > 
> > == Scope ==
> > * Proposal owners:
> > Remove gcc, gcc-c++ from build group in Koji and from buildsys-build
> > group in comps.
> > 
> > * Other developers:
> > Maintainers should follow guidelines and add BuildRequires: gcc if
> > they need it during build (this guideline exists for long time).
> 
> I feel like this is something that many many many packages will not
> have present. For a long time it was acceptable to omit BuildRequires
> for stuff that was in the default build root, and while the C/C++
> packaging guidelines do say you need BR: gcc, I expect most packagers
> have never noticed this changed.
> 
> IOW, if we remove gcc/gcc-c++ from the build root, *before* fixing
> up packages we're going to create a huge pile of rebuild failures.
> 
> Can we please do something here to identify which packages likely have
> missing BR: gcc and automatically fix up the specs, rather than creating
> 100's of failing packages and then waiting weeks in a broken state for
> maintainers to fix them up.

There is no simple way of doing this. Also as other thread mentioned, people
hate automated changes... So for this one we need every single packager to fix
their packaging and not to fix it in automatic way.
- -- 
- -Igor Gnatenko
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=dU4l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@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