Rawhide performance considerations

[Damian Ivanov]

Hello,

I want to find out except, rawhide not being stable, what packages are
negatively impacted in rawhide performance wise and or other build options
that otherwise negatively impact user experience on rawhide compared to
released fedora.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-Mesa-Meson...

Thanks for any hints.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 3/26/19 6:48 AM, Damian Ivanov wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  I want to find out except, rawhide not being stable, what packages are
>  negatively impacted in rawhide performance wise and or other build options
>  that otherwise negatively impact user experience on rawhide compared to
>  released fedora.
>  https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-Mesa-Meson...
The only thing I know in particular that uses extra debugging in rawhide
is the kernel. Each RC build is built without extra debugging and all
the git snapshot ones in between the rc's are built with extra
debugging. So, you can stick with the RC's if you want to avoid debug
kernels. Personally here I don't notice much difference.

The article you note was a bug in how mesa was being configured, not
some intended extra debugging in rawhide.

kevin

[Damian Ivanov]

Thank you for the response Kevin.

Is there a wiki with other build options specific to fedora (like
previously disabled freetype etc) impacting user experience and/or their
alternatives availability at rpmfusion?

Would be nice to have that in the wiki.


On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, 19:46 Kevin Fenzi, <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote:

>  On 3/26/19 6:48 AM, Damian Ivanov wrote:
>  > Hello,
>  >
>  > I want to find out except, rawhide not being stable, what packages are
>  > negatively impacted in rawhide performance wise and or other build
>  options
>  > that otherwise negatively impact user experience on rawhide compared to
>  > released fedora.
>  >
>  https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-Mesa-Meson...
>
>  The only thing I know in particular that uses extra debugging in rawhide
>  is the kernel. Each RC build is built without extra debugging and all
>  the git snapshot ones in between the rc's are built with extra
>  debugging. So, you can stick with the RC's if you want to avoid debug
>  kernels. Personally here I don't notice much difference.
>
>  The article you note was a bug in how mesa was being configured, not
>  some intended extra debugging in rawhide.
>
>  kevin
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  desktop mailing list -- desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave(a)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/[e-mail]...
>

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:37 AM Damian Ivanov <damianatorrpm(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Thank you for the response Kevin.
>
>  Is there a wiki with other build options specific to fedora (like previously disabled
> freetype etc) impacting user experience and/or their alternatives availability at
> rpmfusion?
>
>  Would be nice to have that in the wiki.
>  
Fedora can't put that sort of content in its own wiki because of legal
reasons. (Google "contributory infringement"). RPMFusion exists
because Fedora is bound by US copyright and patent law and cannot ship
certain items. Documenting how to get them somewhere else is
equivalent (from a legal perspective) to providing it.

[John Mellor]

On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 08:50 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:37 AM Damian Ivanov <
>  damianatorrpm(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > Thank you for the response Kevin.
>  > 
>  > Is there a wiki with other build options specific to fedora (like
>  > previously disabled freetype etc) impacting user experience and/or
>  > their alternatives availability at rpmfusion?
>  > 
>  > Would be nice to have that in the wiki.
>  > 
>  
>  Fedora can't put that sort of content in its own wiki because of
>  legal
>  reasons. (Google "contributory infringement"). RPMFusion exists
>  because Fedora is bound by US copyright and patent law and cannot
>  ship
>  certain items. Documenting how to get them somewhere else is
>  equivalent (from a legal perspective) to providing it. 
So how does Canonical do exactly that with the universe component repo
and the various supported and unsupported PPA repos, and why can't
Fedora do it the same way?  It seems like the Fedora interpretation of
U.S. law is quite different than Ubuntu's for unclear reasons.

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 5:53 PM, John Mellor <john.mellor(a)gmail.com&gt; 
wrote:
>  unclear reasons 
Two different sets of lawyers arriving at two different risk assessment 
decisions for two very different companies.

Michael

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 8:54 PM <mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org&gt; wrote:
>  On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 5:53 PM, John Mellor <john.mellor(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > unclear reasons
>
>  Two different sets of lawyers arriving at two different risk assessment
>  decisions for two very different companies. 
Beyond that, Canonical is not a US-based corporation, it is
incorporated in the Isle of Man where the copyright and legal
liability is less clear. Fedora is provided by Red Hat, which A) is
beholden to US law and B) is a much more lucrative target for
malicious litigation.

[Damian Ivanov]

Yes, I understand that. I meant having a list on the wiki which items are
impacted and if** a workaround is available by **3rd parties.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, 02:57 Stephen Gallagher, <sgallagh(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 8:54 PM <mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 5:53 PM, John Mellor <john.mellor(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  > wrote:
>  > > unclear reasons
>  >
>  > Two different sets of lawyers arriving at two different risk assessment
>  > decisions for two very different companies.
>
>  Beyond that, Canonical is not a US-based corporation, it is
>  incorporated in the Isle of Man where the copyright and legal
>  liability is less clear. Fedora is provided by Red Hat, which A) is
>  beholden to US law and B) is a much more lucrative target for
>  malicious litigation.
>  _______________________________________________
>  desktop mailing list -- desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave(a)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/[e-mail]...
>