Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 4/14/19 4:11 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:04 PM Jonathan Dieter  wrote:
>>
>> So, the background is that I'd like to build zchunk for EPEL 6 (it's
>> already built for EPEL 7).  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to
>> build zchunk, so I'd prefer to use a newer version from an SCL, rather
>> than rewrite zchunk to be compatible with an ancient version of gcc.
>>
>> I noticed that SCLs are available for EPEL 7 (note the final repository
>> in the list at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=259),
>> but not for EPEL 6 (see
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140).
> 
> The SCL's have their uses, but for EPEL? I think they'd add
> unnecessary complexity on an an unreliable developer codebase and be a
> really bad idea to rely on for EPEL componenents. RHEL 6 is at release
> 6.10, and should be treated as end-of-life. If the component were
> being embedded into the SCL, then it might make some sense to support.
> But as best I can tell zchunk has nothing to do with the SCL except
> for the gcc requirement.

Just to clarify: When we added devtoolset scl to epel7, the rule was
that it was only to be used for build time, never runtime.

I don't see a big problem doing the same for rhel6, but there hasn't
been any demand for it yet.

If it's strictly build time, I don't see that users would see any
complications from it.

kevin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Jonathan Dieter]

On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 16:01 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 21:06, Todd Zullinger  wrote:
> > Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)
> > 
> > I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
> > When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
> > consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
> > if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
> > once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.
> > 
> > I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
> > it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
> > external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.
> > 
> > Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
> > lists and am passing on outdated data.
> > 
> 
> I believe Todd is correct. At the time there was the package needing
> SCL's was chromium and the owner had no interest for making the
> package in EL6. If zchunk needs it, we can put it in.

That's ok.  I've gone with Kevin Kofler's suggestion and just fixed the
build to work with the old version of GCC.

Thanks, all, for the help!

Jonathan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Dmitry Butskoy]

Stephen John Smoogen wrote:



On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 21:06, Todd Zullinger > wrote:


Neal Gompa wrote:
> If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)

I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.

I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.

Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
lists and am passing on outdated data.


I believe Todd is correct. At the time there was the package needing 
SCL's was chromium and the owner had no interest for making the 
package in EL6. If zchunk needs it, we can put it in.


SeaMonkey as well. +1

Many years Firefox and Seamonkey are compelled to do extra builds of 
gcc-4.8 and python-2.7 at the beginning of the package compiling. And to 
provide an extra sources (gcc and pythin tarballs) in the srpms for this.


It seems that Firefox (part of RHEL packages set) uses SCL now, but 
Seamonkey (former Mozilla/Netscape) still cannot use it.



Dmitry Butskoy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Buc
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:04 PM Jonathan Dieter  wrote:
>
> So, the background is that I'd like to build zchunk for EPEL 6 (it's
> already built for EPEL 7).  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to
> build zchunk, so I'd prefer to use a newer version from an SCL, rather
> than rewrite zchunk to be compatible with an ancient version of gcc.
>
> I noticed that SCLs are available for EPEL 7 (note the final repository
> in the list at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=259),
> but not for EPEL 6 (see
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140).

The SCL's have their uses, but for EPEL? I think they'd add
unnecessary complexity on an an unreliable developer codebase and be a
really bad idea to rely on for EPEL componenents. RHEL 6 is at release
6.10, and should be treated as end-of-life. If the component were
being embedded into the SCL, then it might make some sense to support.
But as best I can tell zchunk has nothing to do with the SCL except
for the gcc requirement.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Kevin Kofler]

Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> For reference, you can find zck.h.in (which gets processed into zck.h
> with the version added) at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/include/zck.h.in
> 
> and zck_private.h at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/src/lib/zck_private.h
> 
> As far as I can see, gcc-4.7 doesn't like that I'm typedefing the same
> struct to the same type twice.  Later versions don't see it as a
> problem at all.
> 
> (Just to be clear, this still happens if I change zck_private.h to say:
> typedef struct zckCtx zckCtx;)

IMHO, zck_private.h should #include "zck.h" and only define itself whatever 
is not defined in the public header.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 21:06, Todd Zullinger  wrote:

> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)
>
> I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
> When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
> consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
> if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
> once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.
>
> I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
> it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
> external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.
>
> Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
> lists and am passing on outdated data.
>
>
I believe Todd is correct. At the time there was the package needing SCL's
was chromium and the owner had no interest for making the package in EL6.
If zchunk needs it, we can put it in.




> --
> Todd
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Todd Zullinger]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)

I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.

I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.

Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
lists and am passing on outdated data.

-- 
Todd


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:37 PM Jonathan Dieter  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 13:11 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> > >  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to build zchunk
> >
> > In what specific way(s)?  Can the complaints from gcc [which version?],
> > or other tools in the toolchain, be listed here?
> > Other developers may have faced the same or similar problems,
> > and may have tools to help.
>
> Sorry, I should have shared that the first time around.
>
> The version of gcc that comes with EL6 is 4.4.7.
>
> When building zchunk, I get a number of messages that look like:
> $ ninja-build
> [1/178] Compiling C object 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o'.
> FAILED: src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o
> cc  -Isrc/lib/zck@sha -Isrc/lib -I../src/lib -Iinclude -I../include -pipe 
> -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Wall -Winvalid-pch -std=gnu99 -O0 -g -DZCHUNK_ZSTD 
> -DZCHUNK_OPENSSL -fvisibility=hidden -fPIC -MMD -MQ 
> 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o' -MF 
> 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o.d' -o 
> 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o' -c ../src/lib/comp/zstd/zstd.c
> In file included from ../src/lib/comp/zstd/zstd.c:34:
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:92: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckCtx'
> include/zck.h:49: note: previous declaration of 'zckCtx' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:106: error: redefinition of typedef 'zck_log_type'
> include/zck.h:47: note: previous declaration of 'zck_log_type' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:117: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckHash'
> include/zck.h:50: note: previous declaration of 'zckHash' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:150: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckDL'
> include/zck.h:54: note: previous declaration of 'zckDL' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:165: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckChunk'
> include/zck.h:51: note: previous declaration of 'zckChunk' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:177: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckIndex'
> include/zck.h:52: note: previous declaration of 'zckIndex' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:193: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckRange'
> include/zck.h:53: note: previous declaration of 'zckRange' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:224: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckComp'
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:91: note: previous declaration of 'zckComp' was here
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:298: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckCtx'
> ../src/lib/zck_private.h:92: note: previous declaration of 'zckCtx' was here
>
> For reference, you can find zck.h.in (which gets processed into zck.h
> with the version added) at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/include/zck.h.in
>
> and zck_private.h at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/src/lib/zck_private.h
>
> As far as I can see, gcc-4.7 doesn't like that I'm typedefing the same
> struct to the same type twice.  Later versions don't see it as a
> problem at all.
>
> (Just to be clear, this still happens if I change zck_private.h to say:
> typedef struct zckCtx zckCtx;)
>

If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?), you can
simply use it by doing the following:

Insert into BRs:
BuildRequires: devtoolset-7-toolchain

Then add to top of %build:
source /opt/rh/devtoolset-7/enable



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[John Reiser]

In file included from ../src/lib/comp/zstd/zstd.c:34:
../src/lib/zck_private.h:92: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckCtx'
include/zck.h:49: note: previous declaration of 'zckCtx' was here



As far as I can see, gcc-4.7 doesn't like that I'm typedefing the same
struct to the same type twice.  Later versions don't see it as a
problem at all.


How about this:
   #ifndef zckCtx_DEFINED  /*{ workaround for gcc-4.4.7 */
   #define zckCtx_DEFINED 1  /* gcc-4.4.7 demands only one declaration of a 
typedef */
   typedef struct zckCtx zckCtx;
   #endif  /*}*/
and similarly for the other 8 "multiply-defined" typedefs?  After 
pre-processing,
then the compiler will see exactly one definition of the typedef.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Jonathan Dieter]

On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 13:11 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> >  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to build zchunk
> 
> In what specific way(s)?  Can the complaints from gcc [which version?],
> or other tools in the toolchain, be listed here?
> Other developers may have faced the same or similar problems,
> and may have tools to help.

Sorry, I should have shared that the first time around.

The version of gcc that comes with EL6 is 4.4.7.

When building zchunk, I get a number of messages that look like:
$ ninja-build 
[1/178] Compiling C object 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o'.
FAILED: src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o 
cc  -Isrc/lib/zck@sha -Isrc/lib -I../src/lib -Iinclude -I../include -pipe 
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Wall -Winvalid-pch -std=gnu99 -O0 -g -DZCHUNK_ZSTD 
-DZCHUNK_OPENSSL -fvisibility=hidden -fPIC -MMD -MQ 
'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o' -MF 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o.d' 
-o 'src/lib/zck@sha/comp_zstd_zstd.c.o' -c ../src/lib/comp/zstd/zstd.c
In file included from ../src/lib/comp/zstd/zstd.c:34:
../src/lib/zck_private.h:92: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckCtx'
include/zck.h:49: note: previous declaration of 'zckCtx' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:106: error: redefinition of typedef 'zck_log_type'
include/zck.h:47: note: previous declaration of 'zck_log_type' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:117: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckHash'
include/zck.h:50: note: previous declaration of 'zckHash' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:150: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckDL'
include/zck.h:54: note: previous declaration of 'zckDL' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:165: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckChunk'
include/zck.h:51: note: previous declaration of 'zckChunk' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:177: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckIndex'
include/zck.h:52: note: previous declaration of 'zckIndex' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:193: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckRange'
include/zck.h:53: note: previous declaration of 'zckRange' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:224: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckComp'
../src/lib/zck_private.h:91: note: previous declaration of 'zckComp' was here
../src/lib/zck_private.h:298: error: redefinition of typedef 'zckCtx'
../src/lib/zck_private.h:92: note: previous declaration of 'zckCtx' was here

For reference, you can find zck.h.in (which gets processed into zck.h
with the version added) at:
https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/include/zck.h.in

and zck_private.h at:
https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/src/lib/zck_private.h

As far as I can see, gcc-4.7 doesn't like that I'm typedefing the same
struct to the same type twice.  Later versions don't see it as a
problem at all.

(Just to be clear, this still happens if I change zck_private.h to say:
typedef struct zckCtx zckCtx;)

Jonathan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[John Reiser]

 Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to build zchunk


In what specific way(s)?  Can the complaints from gcc [which version?],
or other tools in the toolchain, be listed here?
Other developers may have faced the same or similar problems,
and may have tools to help.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

[Jonathan Dieter]

So, the background is that I'd like to build zchunk for EPEL 6 (it's
already built for EPEL 7).  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to
build zchunk, so I'd prefer to use a newer version from an SCL, rather
than rewrite zchunk to be compatible with an ancient version of gcc.

I noticed that SCLs are available for EPEL 7 (note the final repository
in the list at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=259),
but not for EPEL 6 (see 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140).

So, is there any way we can use SCLs for building on EPEL 6, or should
I stop tilting at windmills and just say EL6 is too old for zchunk?

Jonathan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org