[releng] Issue #7017: Set up koji policy/channels for known archful noarch
packages.
by Ralph Bean
ralph reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
Reported by @sgallagh in a discussion with @ralph and @mikeb.
There are these funny things called 'archful noarch' packages. Packages which produce noarch binary rpms, but which can only be built on specific architectures (x86_64, specifically).
In the traditional world, when you submit a build of one of these package to koji, your build is sent to a builder with a random architecture. Usually this is wrong, and your build fails. You then submit and submit again until it works. This is colloquially called "winning the builder lottery." It is annoying, but people put up with it.
In the modular world, this poses a real problem. The MBS won't know *why* the build failed and we can't expect it to try over and over again until it wins the builder lottery. We need a better solution.
The solution we came up with on a whiteboard (a few months ago) was that we can set up a *channel* in koji called `x86_64-builders` (or something like that). Then, start maintaining a list of all known "archful noarch" packages. This could start with one or two packages and then we grow it over time.
We would then create a new koji hub policy that says something like:
"Whenever a build is submitted of a package that matches any of the packages in the curated list, submit the build to the x86_64-builders channel."
What do you think? Will it work?
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7017
5 years, 5 months
[releng] Issue #7012: Tag hierarchy for modular updates.
by Ralph Bean
ralph reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
OK, the patch to bodhi that enables mashing modules is basically done. @mcurlej is wrapping up the test suite. Our target is to merge, release, and deploy it around Sept 20th, just after Beta freeze thaws.
In order to use it, we're going to need to create some new tags for the tag hierarchy.
The tag hierarchy for f27 currently looks like:
~❯ koji list-tag-inheritance --reverse f27
f27 (417)
├─f27-binutils-rebuild (1868)
├─f27-rebuild (1849)
├─f27-gcc-abi-rebuild (1274)
├─f27-atomic (433)
├─f27-openh264 (432)
├─f27-modularity (431)
├─f27-compose (419)
└─f27-updates (418)
├─f27-pending (427)
├─f27-override (424)
│ └─f27-build (425)
│ ├─f27-gnome (2116)
│ ├─f27-ocaml2 (1838)
│ ├─f27-boost (1805)
│ ├─f27-perl (1489)
│ ├─f27-ocaml (1082)
│ ├─f27-llvm4 (493)
│ └─f27-infra (428)
│ └─f27-infra-stg (429)
│ └─f27-infra-candidate (430)
├─f27-updates-pending (423)
├─f27-updates-testing (421)
│ └─f27-updates-testing-pending (422)
│ └─f27-signing-pending (426)
└─f27-updates-candidate (420)
For f27 updates, we're going to need a tag structure something like this:
~❯ koji list-tag-inheritance --reverse f27-modular
f27-modular
└─f27-modular-updates
├─f27-modular-pending
├─f27-modular-updates-pending
├─f27-modular-updates-testing
│ └─f27-modular-updates-testing-pending
│ └─f27-modular-signing-pending
└─f27-modular-updates-candidate
Once that's done (and once the updated bodhi is deployed) we'll need to create a 'F27 Modular' "release" in bodhi's database that points to these tags.
Lastly, the MBS will need to start tagging its built modules into `f27-modular-updates-candidate`.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7012
5 years, 6 months
[releng] Issue #7069: Enable annotaions of binaries compiled by gcc
by Nicholas Clifton
nickc reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
I would like to enable binary annotations for files compiled by gcc. This will allow extra information to be stored in these files, such as which hardening options were used, the stack size requirements, potential ABI conflicts and so on.
In order to do this I propose patching the redhat-rpm-config rpm to enable the use of the annobin plugin. This plugin will add the extra information to the binary files. Some example scripts in the annobin package demonstrate how this information might be used.
This change has several possible consequences for release engineering:
* It might break the building of any package that uses gcc.
[I have tried to test building various packages locally, and these have all succeeded,
but I do not have the equivalent of an entire Fedora build system].
* The size of gcc built binaries will increase. Not by a huge amount I hope, since
the annotation format is designed to be compact, but it could still be a factor. Note
the information is stored in an unallocated section in the binary, so it will not affect
the size of the executable in memory, only on disk.
* if the annotations work it should allow releng the opportunity to add extra checks
for ABI incompatibilities and hardening problems.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7069
6 years, 1 month
[releng] Issue #7018: F27 stable push requests
by Adam Williamson
adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
This ticket will be used for requesting pushes of tested blocker / freeze exception fixes during F27 release freezes. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process . Similar to candidate compose request tickets, this ticket can be closed by releng after each push and re-opened by QA each time a new push is needed.
Please push:
== Blockers ==
* [selinux-policy-3.13.1-280.fc27](https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/F... for [#1488404](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488404) [#1484566](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1484566)
* [389-ds-base-1.3.7.3-1.fc27 freeipa-4.6.0-2.fc27 python-pyldap-2.4.37-2.fc27](https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO... for [#1455561](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455561) [#1483159](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1483159) [#1488295](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488295) [#1465390](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465390) [#1488640](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488640)
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7018
6 years, 5 months