On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 08:52:36PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > Le mercredi 31 juillet 2019 à 17:03 +0200, Andreas Tunek a écrit : > > > > > > On Wed, 31 Jul 2019, 16:10 Nicolas Mailhot via devel, < > > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Le 2019-07-31 14:13, Lennart Poettering a écrit : > > > > > > Hi Lennart > > > > > > > Note that there's a "stable" backport tree maintained outside of > > > the > > > > main repo: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable > > > > > > > > Either way, I doubt this discussion is relevant to Fedora, is it? > > > > > > It was when a lot of users could not test new Fedora devel kernels > > > for > > > about a month, because newer kernels exposed a bug in networkd, and > > > the > > > current systemd release + packaging process was unable to produce > > > a > > > Fedora devel systemd, that worked with Fedora devel kernels > > > > > > > > > I thought Linux was supposed to never ever break username > > > programmes? > > When you choose, like systemd, to rely heavily on kernel capabilities, > with close integration, you pay a heavier price when mistake are made > at the integration level (in this case, as far as I understand it, a > latent networkd bug triggered by later kernel changes). > > And, mistakes happen in real life. So this kind of breakage is a > natural and inevitable consequence of the way systemd was designed. It > is not especially unexpected of scandalous by itself. > > What was *not* a natural consequence of design choices was the time > taken to propagate the fix to affected systems. Broken networking when > pretty much every system nowadays needs networking should have been a > critical point-release fix, with downstream integrators just needing to > bump their packaging/distribution process to the dot release update. Oh, for heaven's sake. What has semantic versioning to do with anything? The patches to fix the issue were known, and it is really not complicated to rebuild systemd with a patch or two. This wasn't done because the few systemd maintainers in Fedora are also upstream developers and we were busy preparing for a release and solving other issues and didn't have time to work on this particular bug. This is at least a second proposal to make the process more complicated, when the problem is in lack of maintainer time. Such changes would only make things worse. Also, when people are running an -rc kernel, some issues are expected. In the beginning it wasn't even clear if the change in the kernel will be reverted or not. > And when, > finally, systemd makes a new release, it does not even use integrator > and automation-friendly semver numbering, but the awful human-oriented > rcx labelling, that requires manual mapping to be understood by > automation (wasting yet more integrator time). Nah, not really. In systemd spec: Version: 243~rc1 %global github_version %(c=%{version}; echo ${c}|tr '~' '-') and that's all the mapping needed. Things just work ;) > So, the relevancy to Fedora, that Lennart did not see, is that all this > lack of care, results in longer breakage time in Fedora. Seriously. We do care and I have no idea why you would say that we don't. If you want to help, go triage or solve some bugs, there's ~200 open if Fedora and ~1000 open upstream, plenty to pick from. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
