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

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

 



On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:57:49 +0200
Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> Dne 24. 06. 24 v 20:03 Peter Robinson napsal(a):
> > On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 11:21, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dne 21. 06. 24 v 18:27 Stephen Smoogen napsal(a):
> >>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 at 07:27, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> So what is the reason to not treat x86_64_v2 as different arch then
> >>>> x86_64_v{1,3}. Why we keep having this discussion instead of fire one
> >>>> more build? Users would need to choose v1 / v2 / v3 ISO but what else?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I can think of three problems which would need to be dealt with
> >>>
> >>> 1. Resource limitations in infrastructure hardware. You are going to
> >>> add to the amount of builds on 1 set of hardware which is already
> >>> doing x86_64 and i686. You are going to add to the storage issues that
> >>> Fedora Infrastructure has to juggle on the maximum 100TB koji
> >>> partition (with 90TB causing some amount of degradation) due to extra
> >>> packages and composes.
> >>> 2. Resource limitations in infrastructure staff. Fedora Infra is doing
> >>> more with less and each additional architecture and focus increases
> >>> that load.
> >>> 3. Resource limitations on packagers. Packagers will need to add yet
> >>> another bug set to cover and determine "is it only on VX" or not.
> >>
> >> Yes, understandably. But are there technical limitations?
> > No, and you could argue to get rid of i686
> >
> >> BTW I guess that e.g. some sort of inheritance reduce the amount of
> >> needed HW.
> > Well that brings other problems, see i686 as an example here, but
> > there's a large percentage of noarch packages in the distro so it's
> > not a full 1:1 package:arch increment.
> 
> 
> I was not speaking about noarch. I assume that you can intermix 
> x86_64_v1 code with x86_64_v3 code on x86_64_v3 capable HW. Is that 
> correct? IOW there could be build just subset of packages for x86_64_v3 
> and rest would be inherited.

aka similar to what was done with i386 and i686 back in the day, and
then with ppc64 + ppc64p7 for a short period of time.


		Dan
--
_______________________________________________
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