Re: Guidance on individual packages requiring x86_64-v2 baseline ?

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

 



On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 16:23, Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 8:40 PM Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 19:13, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> > <dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 17:17, drago01 wrote:
> > > > [...] at some point we need to do the cut and not being held back by old
> > > > / ancient hardware forever.
> > >
> > > What do you mean by "being held back"? What's being prevented by not
> > > requiring x86-64-v2 for all packages while allowing few select ones to
> > > have higher arch requirements? And why do "we need to"?
> > >
> > > As Neal said, rpm allows building for target x86_64_v2, so... let's do
> > > that for those packages that require it?
> >
> > That may mean having two versions of the same package, one built
> > against v1 and one v2, you're then doubling the workload for a whole
> > lot of contributors for the sake of old hardware.
> >
> > We had the same discussions on i686 and the first few times it was
> > proposed it didn't get traction, but it eventually did. There was a
> > i686 SIG which ultimately went nowhere.
> >
> > To put this a different way, would you be prepared to do the work to
> > maintain the old v1 packages if maintainers don't want to maintain 2
> > versions?
>
> IIUC this wouldn't require maintaining a separate package, but just
> adding x86_64-v2 as a separate build *target* for the same package.
>

I don't think Peter meant additional packages since with the i686 it
didn't mean that. What it did mean was having to understand why two
architectures might do things differently and why bugs might show up
in one but not another. It also means that someone needs to
continually help release engineering make sure that the entire Fedora
build system (koji, composers, mock, createrepo, test tools, etc) make
sure the packages get built, and put into the repositories correctly,
that images get made correctly and such. This is continual work
because as has been seen any change to one tool in an update can make
the others stop working in weird ways.

I am not saying this is a 'can't be done'.. but this is not Free Work.
The Fedora release engineering is pretty small, its physical and
compute resources are pretty confined. You can only keep so many
spinning plates going before they all come crashing down.


-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle. -- Ian MacClaren
--
_______________________________________________
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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [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