On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 08:19, Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:21:56AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:07 AM Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2058274 > > > > > > fails to build with: > > > > > > DEBUG util.py:444: No matching package to install: 'ocaml-dune >= > 1.0' > > > > > > This package is in RHEL 9 buildroot (ocaml-dune-2.8.5-5.el9.x86_64). > > > > > > I read an earlier thread ("Subject: [EPEL-devel] Re: Packages > > > disappearing from the EPEL 9 buildroot") and it seems to indicate that > > > RHEL 9 buildroot packages aren't going to be available in EPEL 9. > > > This seems crazy, is it really correct? > > > > > > > It's not crazy. EPEL is intended to build on RHEL content, which means > > we can't depend on something RHEL doesn't publish. If Red Hat wants to > > publish their buildroot repo, then sure, we could use it. > > I wasn't very clear, but I was addressing my remark at Red Hat. > There's really no reason why we (Red Hat) don't publish buildroot, in > fact my personal view is we ought to for open source reasons. > > I do not think you will find much disagreement here.. but after 3+ years of saying it and nothing changing, many of us have made our peace. > > Just because it happens to exist in the CentOS Stream 9 buildroot > > content does not mean we would be able to rely on it once we replace > > CentOS Stream with RHEL for EPEL 9. Thus, we don't use the CentOS > > Stream 9 buildroot either. > > So this was going to be my next question - is it that difficult to use > C9S buildroot packages to replace the "missing" ones? AFAIK they > ought to be almost identical. Obviously they are rebuilds and they > might be a little out of sync, but saves EPEL doing a literal third > rebuild of the same content! > > The issue in the past has been that it takes manual matching at times to make it work. Koji, mock and rpmbuild will all complain in different ways when package content varies in minute ways. Someone then has to rebuild that package when that happens, which usually only is found at 2am by some very cranky engineer who posts a lot of less than polite messages about how EPEL people are complete crap. Or you find that the internal package is good enough to have built the RHEL content but still is lacking something that you expected to be there for anything NOT a RHEL content. Again that takes inspection and someone to care enough to do it. If we need that, then we might as well rebuild the content and make sure it is what we wanted in the first place. > > If we did, we'd wind up in a situation where packages were built once > > and then not buildable ever again. That already kind of happened when > > we initially had that buildroot repo in the EPEL build environment and > > it made it way harder for us to figure out what gaps we had for things > > to build against RHEL later. We've fortunately dealt with the small > > number of cases that occurred from then. > > I'm not sure I totally understand this bit. Is it right to say that > packages wouldn't be "buildable ever again" only in the case where we > used C9S buildroot and then dropped it? If we just use C9S buildroot > packages + RHEL 9 packages - forever - we'd be OK? > > The way Fedora build system deals with RHEL packages is a bit of 'hack' compared to how it builds Fedora packages. It sees them as external packages and (mis)-uses a method which was originally only for bootstrapping a distro to see packages it did not build itself. This then requires additional hacks on top of that to keep the facade working.. those hacks break regularly and have to be manually dealt with. Usually the breakage then requires some 'we can break the koji database again so do a full backup and possibly a restore' actions by Fedora release engineering to delete some entry koji 'thinks' should be there but isn't (or vice versa). [I believe this happened at least twice when we tried mixing stream and non-stream.] > Rich. > > -- > Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat > http://people.redhat.com/~rjones > Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com > Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and > build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > 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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > -- Stephen J Smoogen. Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
