On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:06:21AM -0800, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 7:46 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:46:24PM +0000, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 6:42 PM Ben Cotton <bcotton(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39ModernizeTBB
> > >
> > > 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 ==
> > > Fedora is currently shipping version 2020.3 (released July 10, 2020)
> > > of the Thread Building Blocks library. The current upstream version is
> > > 2021.8 (released December 22, 2022). The Fedora community has
> > > expressed [
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372
> > > interest] in moving the TBB package to track a more modern version of
> > > the upstream.
> > >
> > > == Owner ==
> > > * Name: [[User:trodgers| Thomas Rodgers]]
> > > * Email: trodgers(a)redhat.com
> > >
> > >
> > > == Detailed Description ==
> > > Fedora has shipped with version 2020.3 of the Thread Building Blocks
> > > library since Fedora 33. The
> > > upstream project made a decision to break backward compatibility after
> > > that version was released.
> > > As packages move to match the upstream's changes it becomes more
> > > difficult to defer updating the
> > > Fedora packaging for TBB. The situation is further complicated as
> > > there are currently a majority
> > > of TBB dependent packages which have not been updated to track a new
> > > upstream release, as detailed in this
> > > [
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372#c1 analysis] on
> > > the tracking issue.
> > >
>
> Hi,
>
> sorry for picking up this thread so late…
>
> > > ** A compat package based on the current 2020.3 version of the
> > > existing TBB package will be created.
>
> A reminder: you don't need a new review, a compat package can be
> created without any fuss [1].
>
> [1]
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuideline...
>
>
True, but changing rpms/tbb is a system wide change, yes? And I can't
really execute that change without
also having the compat package, which most of the existing TBB dependent
packages will need to move to, with
a small subset able to remain on the packaging for a newer oneTBB.
Yes, yes. I think the Change proposal is the right thing to do.
I just wanted to clarify, in case you didn't know or wasn't sure, that
the compat package can be created without review. Just less work.
The change proposal seemed at the time to be a place to capture all
of that.
> > This proposal aims to provide a way to modernize the TBB packge
> > > version for Fedora while providing stability for those packages which
> > > continue to depend on the older TBB library version.
> > >
> > > It will be possible to install both devel and runtime versions of both
> > > TBB packages, however the devel compat package for version 2020.3 will
> > > require clients to point to a new include path where the legacy
> > > headers will be found.
>
> Parallel runtime installation is obviously required.
> But is it necessary to have parallel installation of devel headers?
> It might be less work to have conflicting -devel packages and just
> BuildRequire one or the other.
>
It might not be necessary. I don't expect to start the actual work on this
for another 3-4 weeks, we have time to work
through that discussion before committing to it.
Ack.
Zbyszek