On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 11:38 PM Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 4/28/22 07:09, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 9:08 PM Demi Marie Obenour > > <demiobenour@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 4/27/22 07:40, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote: > >>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 09:03:45PM -0500, Carl George wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:25 PM Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden > >>>> <ewoud+fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hello everyone, > >>>>> > >>>>> There is an ancient version of Puppet in EPEL-7. Version 3.6 has been > >>>>> EOL for ages now. https://binford2k.com/2016/11/22/puppet-3.x-eol/ has a > >>>>> nice EOL overview: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Puppet 3 - 2016-12-31 > >>>>> * Puppet 4 - 2018-10-?? > >>>>> * Puppet 5 - 2021-02-?? > >>>>> > >>>>> Puppet 6 requires a newer Ruby version than is available in EL7 so > >>>>> rebasing the whole stack is not going to work. In theory you could use > >>>>> SCLs but I think it's unrealistic to expect that. > >>>>> > >>>>> However, all bugs open for Puppet relate to EPEL-7[1] so I'm wondering > >>>>> what to do. > >>>>> > >>>>> We can close all bugs as WONTFIX (including the security ones), but > >>>>> would it be better to also remove the package from EPEL-7? > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden > >>>>> > >>>>> [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&classification=Fedora&component=puppet&list_id=12574395&product=Fedora&product=Fedora%20EPEL > >>>> > >>>> Retiring epel7's puppet may be the preferred option. It is allowed > >>>> [0], but if you go this route please mention it on the epel-devel list > >>>> (and perhaps epel-announce) first. > >>> > >>> I should have realized this, will bring it up there. > >>> > >>>> Alternatively, have you considered doing an incompatible update [1] to > >>>> version 5? It may already be EOL, but surely that's a better option > >>>> than the current version 3 or removing it entirely. > >>> > >>> The Ruby version in EL7 is simply too old. In theory you could write a > >>> ton of patches to make it compatible again, but the Puppet modules users > >>> have may be assuming Ruby 2.4+ with Puppet 5. Also note that Puppet 5 > >>> itself is already EOL (for more than a year), but packaging Puppet 6 vs > >>> Puppet 5 (or really, Puppet 7 as well) isn't a big difference: you need > >>> a newer Ruby. After that it's all minor differences. > >>> > >>>> [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#what_can_be_retired > >>>> [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/ > >> > >> Bundle a newer Ruby? > > > > RHEL 7 has published "software collection library" versions of ruby, > > titled "rh-ruby25". > > > > As somebody who's backported bulky software for RHEL based operating > > systems, like Samba and current ansible and airflow and yes, years > > ago, puppet, I don't recommend installing your own ruby. Resolving the > > dependencies gets painful, fast. > > In that case, I would be fine with saying, “if you need to run Puppet > on RHEL 7, do so in a container or VM based on a newer RHEL”. > Puppet is not very useful in a container. It's a systems management tool, so it's designed to manage the computer itself. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
