3:01 a.m.
Hi,
this question is for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099771:
'Review Request: wult - Tool for measuring Intel CPU C-state wake latency'.
The full project consists of user-space tooling and a kernel driver that is under
development. The package wants to include the kernel drivers sources to make it
easier for users to compile the driver on the end-user machine. Is this OK
according to our guidelines?
Zbyszek
3:07 a.m.
Hi Zbyszek,
According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
HTH.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:02 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
Hi,
this question is for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099771:
'Review Request: wult - Tool for measuring Intel CPU C-state wake latency'.
The full project consists of user-space tooling and a kernel driver that is under
development. The package wants to include the kernel drivers sources to make it
easier for users to compile the driver on the end-user machine. Is this OK
according to our guidelines?
Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave(a)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/packaging@lists.fedoraproje...
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Ziqian SUN (Zamir)
zsun(a)fedoraproject.org
GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
Want to know more about Fedora?
Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
3:11 a.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
* Zamir Sun:
Hi Zbyszek,
According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
kernel module sources.
Thanks,
Florian
3:14 a.m.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
* Zamir Sun:
> Hi Zbyszek,
>
> According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
>
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
kernel module sources.
Hi Florian,
In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before the
pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
not.
"Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
with the Kernel Team."
Feel free to correct me if I mis-understood this.
Thanks.
Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave(a)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/packaging@lists.fedoraproje...
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Ziqian SUN (Zamir)
zsun(a)fedoraproject.org
GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
Want to know more about Fedora?
Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
3:15 a.m.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zamir Sun <zsun(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> * Zamir Sun:
>
> > Hi Zbyszek,
> >
> > According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
> >
> >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
>
> That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
> kernel module sources.
>
Hi Florian,
In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before the
pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
not.
"Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
with the Kernel Team."
sorry, copy-paste issue
"Fedora does not allow kernel modules to be packaged outside of the
main kernel package. You should communicate with the Kernel Team
regarding enabling additional kernel modules."
Feel free to correct me if I mis-understood this.
Thanks.
> Thanks,
> Florian
> _______________________________________________
> packaging mailing list -- packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave(a)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/packaging@lists.fedoraproje...
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Ziqian SUN (Zamir)
zsun(a)fedoraproject.org
GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
Want to know more about Fedora?
Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
3:36 a.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 04:15:51PM +0800, Zamir Sun wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zamir Sun
<zsun(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > * Zamir Sun:
> >
> > > Hi Zbyszek,
> > >
> > > According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
> > >
> > >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
> >
> > That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
> > kernel module sources.
> >
>
> Hi Florian,
>
> In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before the
> pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
> not.
>
> "Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
> alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
> kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
> with the Kernel Team."
sorry, copy-paste issue
"Fedora does not allow kernel modules to be packaged outside of the
main kernel package. You should communicate with the Kernel Team
regarding enabling additional kernel modules."
I guess it'd be easiest if the kernel maintainers chimed in directly:
/cc kernel-maint(a)fp.o
I always understood the packaging guideline to be a mechanism to prevent
users assuming that a kernel module installed from the repos is supported
by the Fedora kernel maintainers. If the user has to compile the module from
sources, it should be clear enough that this is outside of scope of support.
Zbyszek
3:42 a.m.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 10:37 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 04:15:51PM +0800, Zamir Sun wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zamir Sun <zsun(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > > * Zamir Sun:
> > >
> > > > Hi Zbyszek,
> > > >
> > > > According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
> > > >
> > > >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
> > >
> > > That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
> > > kernel module sources.
> > >
> >
> > Hi Florian,
> >
> > In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before the
> > pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
> > not.
> >
> > "Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
> > alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
> > kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
> > with the Kernel Team."
>
> sorry, copy-paste issue
>
> "Fedora does not allow kernel modules to be packaged outside of the
> main kernel package. You should communicate with the Kernel Team
> regarding enabling additional kernel modules."
I guess it'd be easiest if the kernel maintainers chimed in directly:
/cc kernel-maint(a)fp.o
I always understood the packaging guideline to be a mechanism to prevent
users assuming that a kernel module installed from the repos is supported
by the Fedora kernel maintainers. If the user has to compile the module from
sources, it should be clear enough that this is outside of scope of support.
I'm not so sure about that. akmods would fit that definition too:
package only contains sources, user compiles them on their local
machine - albeit automatically, in this case.
And akmods are only shipped by rpmfusion. I would recommend doing the
same here: Package the (optional?) kernel module as an akmod and ship
it via rpmfusion.
However, if the kernel module is *not* optional, then it's not allowed
in Fedora repositories at all, given our "MUST NOT include software
that is not functional without dependencies on packages from
third-party repositories", and in that case, I'd move the whole
package to rpmfusion.
Fabio
4:47 a.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 10:42:08AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 10:37 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 04:15:51PM +0800, Zamir Sun wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zamir Sun <zsun(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > * Zamir Sun:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Zbyszek,
> > > > >
> > > > > According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
> > > > >
> > > > >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
> > > >
> > > > That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is
about
> > > > kernel module sources.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Florian,
> > >
> > > In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before
the
> > > pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > "Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
> > > alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
> > > kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
> > > with the Kernel Team."
> >
> > sorry, copy-paste issue
> >
> > "Fedora does not allow kernel modules to be packaged outside of the
> > main kernel package. You should communicate with the Kernel Team
> > regarding enabling additional kernel modules."
>
> I guess it'd be easiest if the kernel maintainers chimed in directly:
> /cc kernel-maint(a)fp.o
>
> I always understood the packaging guideline to be a mechanism to prevent
> users assuming that a kernel module installed from the repos is supported
> by the Fedora kernel maintainers. If the user has to compile the module from
> sources, it should be clear enough that this is outside of scope of support.
I'm not so sure about that. akmods would fit that definition too:
package only contains sources, user compiles them on their local
machine - albeit automatically, in this case.
And akmods are only shipped by rpmfusion. I would recommend doing the
same here: Package the (optional?) kernel module as an akmod and ship
it via rpmfusion.
However, if the kernel module is *not* optional, then it's not allowed
in Fedora repositories at all, given our "MUST NOT include software
that is not functional without dependencies on packages from
third-party repositories", and in that case, I'd move the whole
package to rpmfusion.
So… the question becomes: do we still want this guideline? There is no
general _legal_ or _technical_ reason to not allow external kernel
modules to be packaged. (In some specific cases, the license might be
"bad", but that'd be specific to the module, just as for any other
software type).
Why do we make people to jump through hoops? We don't have this kind
of rule for non-kernel software. For example, I'm allowed to package
almost any extension or alternative for apache httpd.
PROPOSAL:
Drop the blanket prohibition of packaging of kernel modules.
Only disallow packaging of kernel modules in specific scenarios:
- the module is an alternative version of a module that is already
packaged in Fedora
- there are technical or legal reasons not to package a module
(the license is not FOSS, the license is unclear or suspicious)
With the following caveats:
- the package must clearly state that the module is non-upstream
and is not supported by fedora kenrel maintainers
- non-upstream kernel modules must add a taint to the kernel
that a non-upstream module was loaded, and the kernel team is free
to close or reassign any bug reports reported with the taint.
Zbyszek
1:01 p.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
>>>> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl>
writes:
So… the question becomes: do we still want this guideline? There is
no
general _legal_ or _technical_ reason to not allow external kernel
modules to be packaged.
The guideline was originally added way back in the earlier days of Fedora,
on as a result of discussions between FESCo, the packaging committee and
the kernel maintainers (which I think was basically just Dave Jones at
the time). The idea was simply the obvious: external modules that cause
bugs end up falling on the kernel maintainers to sort out, and that task
is hard enough without a random assortment of modules in the way.
There were other considerations as well. Pre-akmods it was difficult to
keep modules and the main kernel version in sync, but that's not much of
a consideration these days. The issue of incompatibility remains,
though; modules may not always be compatible with new kernels, so what
happens when a module package hasn't been ported? Do the kernel
maintainers now have to worry about maintaining compatibility?
In any case, if the kernel maintainers no longer want this policy, then
of course we shouldn't have it. But if they do still want it to be in
place then I would be against removing it.
So go ahead and ask the maintainers, and they can let us (the packaging
committee) know what they desire. It's entirely possible that the
answer will be different now, all these years later. I would assume
that the kernel maintainer team is completely different at this point.
If they do not wish to continue the policy then we'll just need to work
out a new one, and certainly guidelines will be needed.
- J<
4:54 a.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
Hello everyone, thank you for all the comments.
As it seems this will take some time so let me exclude driver sources
from the package.
BR,
Ali
On 08/07/2022 21:01, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> writes:
> So… the question becomes: do we still want this guideline? There is no
> general _legal_ or _technical_ reason to not allow external kernel
> modules to be packaged.
The guideline was originally added way back in the earlier days of Fedora,
on as a result of discussions between FESCo, the packaging committee and
the kernel maintainers (which I think was basically just Dave Jones at
the time). The idea was simply the obvious: external modules that cause
bugs end up falling on the kernel maintainers to sort out, and that task
is hard enough without a random assortment of modules in the way.
There were other considerations as well. Pre-akmods it was difficult to
keep modules and the main kernel version in sync, but that's not much of
a consideration these days. The issue of incompatibility remains,
though; modules may not always be compatible with new kernels, so what
happens when a module package hasn't been ported? Do the kernel
maintainers now have to worry about maintaining compatibility?
In any case, if the kernel maintainers no longer want this policy, then
of course we shouldn't have it. But if they do still want it to be in
place then I would be against removing it.
So go ahead and ask the maintainers, and they can let us (the packaging
committee) know what they desire. It's entirely possible that the
answer will be different now, all these years later. I would assume
that the kernel maintainer team is completely different at this point.
If they do not wish to continue the policy then we'll just need to work
out a new one, and certainly guidelines will be needed.
- J<
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Finland Oy
Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki
Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4
Domiciled in Helsinki
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
4:07 a.m.
New subject: inclusion of kernel module sources in a package
* Zamir Sun:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 4:11 PM Florian Weimer
<fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> * Zamir Sun:
>
> > Hi Zbyszek,
> >
> > According to the policy, kernel modules are not allowed
> >
> >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
>
> That section talks about pre-built binaries. The question here is about
> kernel module sources.
>
Hi Florian,
In the section "No external kernel modules" (which is before the
pre-build binary section), I did not see it mentioning pre-build or
not.
"Fedora allows only a single kernel package; packages containing
alternate kernels are not allowed in the distribution. If there are
kernel features which would be generally useful, please communicate
with the Kernel Team."
Yeah, looks like you are right. Not sure if I could have missed that.
Thanks,
Florian
630
days inactive
651
days old
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
10 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Ali Erdinc Koroglu -
Fabio Valentini -
Florian Weimer -
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Zamir Sun -
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek