FESCo wants to know what you use i686 packages for
by David Cantrell
Hi,
Our most recent FESCo meeting involved discussing the proposal to drop i686
builds of jdk8,11,17 from Fedora 37 onward. The topic quickly changed to the
larger question of "what do people use i686 packages for?"
Rather than guess, we wanted to ask the community what you use i686 packages
for in Fedora. There are no wrong answers here. We are seeking information.
Why? Since the removal of the i686 kernel in Fedora, we want to reduce the
number of i686 packages provided in the repo. As time marches on, the ability
to build a lot of things for i686 becomes unrealistic or even impossible.
Remember it goes beyond providing builds...providing support, bug fixes, and
security fixes for those packages too. Maybe some things using i686 packages
now can move to x86_64 packages. We do not know yet, but a goal is to figure
out what packages, if anything, can drop their i686 builds.
NOTE: Nothing is changing now. We are in an information gathering phase.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you use i686 packages for something now, please respond to this thread.
Thanks,
--
David Cantrell <dcantrell(a)redhat.com>
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT
1 year, 3 months
F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)
by Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
Make DNF5 the new default packaging tool. The change will replace DNF,
LIBDNF, and DNF-AUTOMATIC with the new DNF5 and new Libdnf5 library.
It is a second step after
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MajorUpgradeOfMicrodnf.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:jmracek| Jaroslav Mracek]]
* Email: jmracek(a)redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
The new DNF5 will provide a significant improvement in user
experiences and performance. The replacement is the second step in
upgrade of Fedora Software Management stack. Without the change there
will be multiple software management tool (DNF5, old Microdnf,
PackageKit, and DNF) based on different libraries (libdnf, libdnf5),
providing a different behavior, and not sharing a history. We can also
expect that DNF will have only limited support from upstream. The DNF5
development was announced on
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
Fedora-Devel] list in 2020.
=== New DNF5 Features ===
* Fully featured package manager without requirement of Python
** Smaller system
** Faster
** Replace DNF and Microdnf
* Unified behavior of in the software management stack
** New Libdnf5 plugins (C++, Python) will be applicable to DNF5, Dnf5Daemon
*** DNF4 plugins were not applicable for PackageKit and Microdnf (e.g.
versionlock, subscription-manager), therefore PackageKit behaves
differently in comparison to DNF
** Shared configurations
*** In DNF4 not all configuration is honored by PackageKit and Microdnf
** DNF/YUM was developed for decades with impact of multiple styles
and naming conventions (options, configuration, options, commands)
* New Daemon
** The new daemon can provide an alternative to PackageKit for RPMs
(only one backend of PackageKit) if it will be integrated into Desktop
** Support of Modularity and Comps group
* Performance improvement
** Loading of repositories
** Advisory operations
** RPM queries
*** Name filters with a case-insensitive search (the `repoquery` command)
** Smart sharing of metadata between dnf5 and daemon
*** Reduce disk and downloads requirements
*** Currently, DNF, Microdnf, and PackageKit use their own cache
*** Optional, may be not available for Fedora 39
* Decrease of a maintenance cost in the long term
** Shared plugins
** Removal of functional duplicates
* Fully integrated Modularity in LIBDNF5 workflows
** The Modularity is supported in DNF and LIBDNF but it is not fully
integrated. Integration was not possible due to limitation of
compatibility with other tools (PackageKit)
** Fully integrated Modularity required changes in the library workflow
=== Major codebase improvements ===
*Reports in structure
** DNF reports a lot of important information only in logs
* Removal of duplicated implementation
** LIBDNF evolved from LIBHIF (PackageKit library) and HAWKEY (DNF
library). The integration was never finished, therefore LIBDNF still
contains duplicated functionality.
** decrease of the code maintenance cost in future
* Unify Python bindings
** Formal Libdnf provides two types of Python bindings
*** CPython (hawkey)
*** SWIG (libdnf)
** Maintaining and communication between both bindings requires a lot
of resources
** Binding unification was not possible without breaking API compatibility
* SWIG bindings
** With SWIG we can generate additional bindings without spending huge resources
** Code in particular languages will be very similar to each other
* Separation of system state from history DB and `/etc/dnf/module.d`
** In dnf-4 the list of userinstalled packages and list of installed
groups along with the lists of packages installed from them is
computed as an aggregation of transaction history. In dnf5 it will be
stored separately, having multiple benefits, among them that the
history database will serve for informational purposes only and will
not define the state of the system (it gets corrupted occasionally
etc.).
** Data stored in `/etc/dnf/module.d` were not supposed to be user
modifiable and their format is not sufficient (missing information
about installed packages with installed profiles)
*** Content of `/etc/dnf/module.d` will be moved into the System State
== Feedback ==
== Benefit to Fedora ==
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
DNF5 is still in the development and some of the features or options
are not yet available. We still have to finish the implementation of
Modularity, storing internal data related to History and System State,
and also documentation and man pages. DNF5 can be tested from
repository with upstream nightly builds -
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-unstable/.
The project's github repository is here -
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/
* Other developers:
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues #Releng issue number]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives:
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`,
and DNF plugins (core and extras). python3-dnf and LIBDNF (`libdnf`,
`python3-hawkey`) will be obsoleted by `fedora-obsolete-packages`.
=== Compatibility ===
The new DNF5 will provide a symlink to `/usr/bin/dnf` therefore users
will see the replacement as an upgrade of DNF with limited but
documented syntax changes. The DNF5 will provide some compatible
aliases of commands and options to improve adoption of the DNF5.
== How To Test ==
Install `dnf5` package from
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-unstable/
== User Experience ==
* Improved progress bars
* Improved transaction table
* Transaction progress reports including scriptlets reports
* Support of local rpm for transaction operation
* Great bash completion (better then DNF has)
* New commands and options that are only available with `DNF`
== Dependencies ==
There is a long list of dependent packages
=== dnf ===
auter
calamares
copr-builder
cpanspec
dnf-plugin-diff
dnfdragora
etckeeper-dnf
fedora-review
fedora-upgrade
kiwi-systemdeps-core
libdnf-plugin-subscription-manager
lpf
mock
osbuild
perl-CPAN-Plugin-Sysdeps
policycoreutils-devel
rbm
subscription-manager
supermin
system-config-language
=== python3-dnf ===
anaconda-core
dnf-plugin-ovl
dnfdaemon
fedora-easy-karma
fedora-review
lorax
mock-core-configs
module-build-service
modulemd-tools
needrestart
pungi
python3-bodhi-client
python3-dnf-plugin-cow
python3-dnf-plugin-flunk_dependent_remove
python3-imgcreate
python3-libreport
retrace-server
system-config-language
=== libdnf ===
PackageKit
copr-builder
gnome-software-rpm-ostree
libdnf-plugin-subscription-manager
libdnf-plugin-swidtags
libdnf-plugin-txnupd
=== python3-hawkey ===
mock-core-configs
modulemd-tools
python3-rpmdeplint
retrace-server
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?)
* Contingency deadline:
* Blocks release?
== Documentation ==
none
== Release Notes ==
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
1 year, 3 months
Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F36 to F37
by Miroslav Suchý
Do you want to make Fedora 37 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run:
# Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
# next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
sudo dnf module reset '*'
dnf --releasever=37 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f37 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential problems.
You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the actual upgrade.
In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate package.
Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 37. Please check existing reports against
fedora-obsolete-packages first:
https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F37FailsToInstall) reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=2045109&bug_id_type=anddep...
Thank you
Miroslav
1 year, 3 months
"rescue" boot entry files are not updated on OS upgrades
by Chris Murphy
Summary----------
Most all Fedora variants (except Cloud) have a GRUB menu entry
containing the word "rescue". This kernel+initramfs pair are never
updated for the life of a Fedora installation. And they quickly become
stale as a Fedora installation ages. This kernel's modules are
eventually deleted, and if selected at boot time, the typical user
experience is a dracut shell.
Basic background-------------
(skip this section if you know how it works)
During a new installation, a single kernel version is installed. e.g.
vmlinuz-5.17.0-0.rc4.96.fc36.x86_64 which is then duplicated as e.g.
vmlinuz-0-rescue-3a86878de5d649a983916543ece7bb7e.
Each of those (identical) kernels has an initramfs file:
initramfs-5.17.0-0.rc4.96.fc36.x86_64.img
initramfs-0-rescue-3a86878de5d649a983916543ece7bb7e.img
The sole difference is the first one is a smaller host-only initramfs,
the second one is a larger no host-only initramfs created with `dracut
-N`. The bigger one just contains a bunch of extra kernel modules and
dracut scripts, ostensibly to make it more likely to boot a system
with some change in hardware that the host-only initramfs doesn't
contain. The size of this rescue initramfs is around 100 MiB, with the
common day to day "host only" initramfs being around 33 MiB. [1]
As the system is updated, additional kernel versions are installed.
dnf.conf contains installonly_limit=3, which results in a maximum of
three kernel versions being installed at a time. Once a fourth kernel
is installed, the first kernel and its modules are removed from
/usr/lib/modules. The rescue kernel+initramfs pair are never updated
or upgraded, even during system upgrades.
Observations------------
This has been discussed by the Workstation working group [2] but since
this functionality is present in all of Fedora, we're moving the
discussion for greater visibility.
There's two separate complaints, if you will: (a) that the
kernel+initramfs pair are never update or upgraded for the life of the
installation; and (b) that even during one release cycle, the user
experience when booting the rescue entry, changes, i.e. when the
matching /usr/lib/modules for the rescue entry are present early on,
you do get a full runtime behavior, you will get to a graphical
environment. But then once the version matched /usr/lib/modules are
removed, you get a completely different behavior when booting the
rescue entry.
An important note from that ticket from Justin Forbes, the Fedora
kernel maintainer: " Remember, the only real purpose of the rescue
kernel is to get your system out of something completely unusable. It
isn't meant to be a full runtime."
Questions------------
* Considering the very narrow purpose of the entry, maybe the current
behavior is adequate?
* Does the rescue entry reliably get users to a dracut prompt, rather
than indefinite hang? I don't know whether it does.
* Is there any way to improve the situation without increasing the
risk that the rescue entry becomes totally non-functional?
* The chosen kernel version needs to be based on one that is known
to boot. Currently we know the kernel+initramfs pair work because it's
the same version used to boot the installation media when doing the
initial provisioning. We don't actually know an updated replacement
"no host-only" initramfs will work until it's tried. Is it possible to
automate this? And is it worth the risk, or even figuring out how to
assess the risk?
* At Flock 2021, Zbyszek proposed "Building Initrd Images from
RPMs" to reduce the complexity of building initramfs, maybe there's a
role for it here? More: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GATg_bqmASc
* What happens if we accept some scope creep, and go for many
improvements that make the extra work worth it?
* What about the unsigned nature of the initramfs? Should we be
creating initramfs's in Fedora infra and signing them?
* Stuff a graphical rescue environment into the initramfs? (This
might be ten leaps too far, but it's intended to encourage thinking
with a vivid imagination.)
[1] both values from a recent Fedora 36 Workstation installation
[2] https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/259
--
Chris Murphy
1 year, 3 months
Orphaned X11 packages
by Adam Jackson
The following packages, previously owned by xgl-maint, are now up for grabs:
xorg-x11-xfs
xorg-sgml-doctools
xorg-x11-drv-v4l
xorg-x11-xsm
xorg-x11-twm
xorg-x11-drv-sisusb
xorg-x11-xdm
xorg-x11-docs
Upstream development on all of these is pretty much nil, so if you're
serious about picking up any of these you may also wish to take on the
module upstream:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg
- ajax
1 year, 4 months
F38 proposal: RPM Sequoia (System-Wide Change proposal)
by Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RpmSequoia
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
Change RPM to use [https://sequoia-pgp.org/ Sequoia] based OpenPGP
parser instead of it's own, flawed and limited implementation.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pmatilai| Panu Matilainen]]
* Email: pmatilai(a)redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
For the last 20 years or so, RPM has used a home-grown OpenPGP parser
for dealing with keys and signatures. That parser is rather infamous
for its limitations and flaws, and especially in recent years has
proven a significant burden to RPM development. In order to improve
security and free developer resources for dealing with RPM's "core
business" instead, RPM upstream is in the process of deprecating the
internal parser in favor of [https://sequoia-pgp.org/ Sequoia PGP]
based solution written in Rust.
At this point the change is mostly invisible in normal daily use.
== Feedback ==
== Benefit to Fedora ==
The main, direct benefit to Fedora is improved security and
standards-compliance (RFC-4880) in one of the corner-stones of the
whole distribution. Longer term, we can expect better error messages
and other functional improvements regarding key and signature
handling.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Help [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087499
package/review rpm-sequoia]
** Build rpm with --with-crypto=sequoia
** Watch out for the unexpected
* Other developers:
** Help [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087499
package/review rpm-sequoia]
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11077 #11077]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives: N/A
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Within Fedora package set, this has no impact as everything is already
using sufficiently strong crypto. Third party repositories / packages
could be signed with insecure crypto, and those may require working
around with --nosignature. However this incidentally overlaps with
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings3Forewarning2
which has effectively the same effect on rpm.
== How To Test ==
In general, normal rpm/dnf use provides sufficient test coverage. For
more advanced testers: try signing and verifying with different keys
and their subkeys, using different algorithms etc.
== User Experience ==
For normal usage, the change is quite invisible. The notable exceptions are
- Some old, insecure (MD5/SHA1 based) signatures are rejected (this is
in line with the stronger crypto settings proposed elsewhere for F38)
- Key import may accept some previously rejected keys, in part due to
limitations of old parser etc but in particular, the old
implementation verifies self-signatures at import time whereas Sequoia
verifies them at time of use.
- Key import may reject some previously accepted keys due to better validation.
== Dependencies ==
The change introduces one new direct dependency:
[https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm-sequoia/ rpm-sequoia].
The rpm-sequoia package also takes over other crypto besides OpenPGP,
currently Sequoia uses nettle as its low-level crypto provider, but
work is underway to
[https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/sequoia/-/merge_requests/1361 support
openssl in Sequoia], and the plan is to have Sequoia in Fedora use
that once it becomes available. This plan
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
has support of the crypto team].
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Revert back to the internal PGP parser
* Contingency deadline: Beta release
* Blocks release? No
== Documentation ==
There's not much in the way of documentation as there's not much to
document, except for the deprecation of the internal parser:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1935
rpm-sequoia build instructions can be found in
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm-sequoia/
== Release Notes ==
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
1 year, 4 months
F38 proposal: Node.js Repackaging (Self-Contained Change proposal)
by Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NodejsRepackaging
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
We are reworking the Node.js packaging to make Node.js versions
available as parallel-installable packages.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:SGallagh| Stephen Gallagher]]
* Email: sgallagh(a)redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
We will be creating the packages nodejs-16, nodejs-18 and (in April)
nodejs-20. These packages will be parallel-installable (with the
exception of the -devel subpackages) and provide
`/usr/bin/node-$MAJOR`. We will also take advantage of the
`alternatives` subsystem to populate `/usr/bin/node` from the default
Node.js version for that release, or if the default is not installed,
the highest currently-installed version.
Notes:
* The default in Fedora 38 will be Node.js 18. If a user was to
install Node.js 16 and Node.js 20, but not Node.js 18, then Node.js 20
would provide `/usr/bin/node`
* The policy going forward will be to have the most recently-released
version of Node.js at the time of Fedora's expected Beta release date
be the default for that release throughout its lifetime.
== Feedback ==
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject....
Mailing list thread]
Neal Gompa raised the question of using a subpackage to own
`/usr/bin/node` instead of using the `alternatives` subsystem, citing
python as an example. My response was that the problem with this is
that I want `/usr/bin/node` to always be available so long as any
`nodejs-$MAJOR` version is installed. It also ensures that the
`node(1)` manpage always matches the `/usr/bin/node` executable.
== Benefit to Fedora ==
=== User Benefits ===
* Provides a simple way to have a different (or multiple) Node.js
interpreters on their system. No dealing with Modularity.
* Enables multiple versions of Node.js on the system (can test code
against different versions without using containers)
=== Packager Benefits ===
* No more modules to maintain.
* Availability of multiple Node.js versions in the buildroot means
that other `nodejs-*` packages can test against multiple supported
options.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
The packaging work is done and can be played with at
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sgallagh/nodejs-alternatives/
today.
* Other developers:
There should be no need to change any dependent packages, though
packagers of Node.js software may wish to take advantage of the
testing opportunities afforded.
* Release engineering:
* Policies and guidelines: We will be updating the Node.js Packaging
Guidelines with the new best practices.
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives: N/A
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Systems using the existing nodejs RPM package will be upgraded to the
matching `nodejs-$MAJOR` version. Work is pending on how to migrate
users of Modular Node.js to the new packages.
== How To Test ==
== User Experience ==
Done correctly, this should be handled entirely without the user's
need to know about it.
== Dependencies ==
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) N/A (not a
System Wide Change)
* Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
* Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change)
== Documentation ==
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject....
== Release Notes ==
Multiple releases of Node.js may now be installed in parallel from the
Fedora repositories.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
1 year, 4 months
