An update about: Checking the ABI of packages submitted to the updates-testing Fedora repository

[Kamil Paral]

> Then, when the package N-udpate-V-R is later submitted to Bodhi, the
> update creation process would query ResultDB for the result of the
> relevant ABI check that happened at build time.  The decision to allow
> an automatic push of the update to stable will depend on the result of
> that query.

This feature might take some longer time. Until that is in place, the results will be visible in ResultsDB for anyone interested in looking at them, and hopefully we will start sending out fedmsg in the near future, so you can listen for it as well. 

> 
> For this system to start working, we need a set of things to fall into
> place.  As noted in the tracking issue that I linked to above, we
> need to:
> 
> 	* Extend koji directive to allow the download of debug info
>           package. https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T494.
>           This is done now.
> 
> 	* Support "latest stable build" with koji
>           directive. https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T491.
> 
>         * Have an abipkdiff tool, from the libabigail project that
>           would compare binaries embedded in two RPMs and produce a
>           report.  This is tracked by
>           https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18426.
> 	  The tool recently started to work in the branch
>           ksinny/abipkgtool.  We are still working on it, but it can
>           be used for prototyping already.
> 
>         * Have a Taskotron task that will use all of the above to
>           perform the ABI comparison and store the result in ResultDB.
>           
>           Note that in the beginning, we'll perform only a basic kind of
>           comparison: checking that no public symbols of functions and
>           variables present in the stable version disappeared in the
>           update.
> 
>           Obviously, the Libabigail tools can perform more sophisticated
>           comparison involving the full signature of the functions and
>           variables, including their sub-types.  But we think that
>           should be left for later when the whole system works for the
>           basic kind of ABI checks first.
>           
>           I still need to file a tracking issue for this.  I guess I
>           can file it to Phabricator instance of Taskotron and assign
>           it to myself?

Sure, you can use "new-check-ideas" project for that. We'll be happy to help.

> 
>         * Write a system wide change proposal for this project.

I don't think that is needed until we're able to stop Bodhi from pushing an update (for Koji-based checks).

> 
> So this is where we stand at the moment.

Also, one further request was to be able to retrieve a rule whitelist from distgit. A relevant discussion is occurring in the packaging mailing list ("Packages without a dist tag" subject).