FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-05-2010, 09:03 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

(Starting a new thread because this hardly has anything to do with the
original infamous thread.
Dear hall monitors: I hope I won't get put on moderation for posting this,
but this subthread didn't have much to do with the original subject. If you
also want me to stop posting to this split thread, please tell me and I will
refrain from posting further replies to it. Thanks for your understanding
and I apologize if I'm offending anybody by replying.)

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> So what? That's not twice as much as FE6, which would not have taken
> several hours to push into such a repo. Not even when running repoclosure
> on the needsign repo prior to pushing and when updating repoview pages
> afterwards. Simply because the code that was used worked very differently
> than "mash".

Yeah, basically "mash" is a really brute force solution, I think directly
writing out only the new updates as the first prototypes of Bodhi did and as
the Extras scripts also did/do is a much smarter solution. Always
recomputing everything sucks.

It was claimed that recomputing is necessary for some obscure multilib
corner cases. Let me suggest a radical solution for that: drop multilib
repos! If users really want 32-bit packages, they should enable the 32-bit
repo. Yes, this will cause file conflicts if you configure yum to always
drag in both versions by default (exactarch=0). So don't do that. Maybe even
remove that "feature" from yum altogether. Yum already knows how to fetch
those 32-bit libs that are actually needed.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-05-2010, 05:22 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

Bill Nottingham wrote:
> The issue there is then you have to properly determine what packages
> to remove from the repo (unless you just keep everything, which has its
> own problems); in this case, recomputing actually makes the code simpler.

Sure, it makes the code simpler, but a lot slower! Often, performance
optimizations require more complex code.

> While that would make things simpler and shorter, I doubt it's really
> practical. Enough people use and want multilib that I don't think we can
> just unilaterally remove it. Moreover, the multilib portion of the compose
> isn't the primary time eater.
>
> I certianly don't want to go back to the whitelist case where every time
> someone needed a new multilib package we had to update a static whitelist
> in the update push tool. That's just silly.

Why can't we just tell them to add the 32-bit repo to their configuration?
Possibly even ship fedora-32bit and fedora-updates-32bit configs (disabled
by default)? With the exactarch=1 setting (the current default), this
shouldn't be a big problem. The only problem I see is that people would run
into file conflicts if they use exactarch=0 or yum install
someapplication.i686, but it's easy to close those as NOTABUG ("sorry,
multilib is not supported for this package, just use the 64-bit version").
If those reports become a big problem, isa-based Conflicts tags could be
added.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-05-2010, 09:37 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Off the top of my head, it would break the install DVD usage case

The install DVD wouldn't have 32-bit baggage. So what? It's not installed by
default anyway. (At least the live images don't contain ANY multilib stuff.
I'm not sure what the DVD does these days.)

> and the wine usage case.

They'd just have to enable the 32bit repos and install wine.i686. (And W64
binaries would even work with the default wine, but I realize those are not
the common case.)

> It would also make multilib_policy as a configuration option meaningless,
> as you couldn't ever set it to anything other than 'best' and expect it to
> work.

So drop that option. I never understood the point of installing 32-bit
versions of EVERYTHING as opposed to just the 32-bit stuff that's actually
needed anyway. And in this case removing the option would actually allow us
to improve things (less duplication in the repos, smaller metadata for those
of us with pure 64-bit systems etc.), unlike some gratuitously removed
options in e.g. GNOME.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-08-2010, 10:31 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> You forget people developing proprietary software...

Why would we want to encourage or even support that?

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-10-2010, 11:01 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> Hmm, maybe then you are thinking of things that are far less
> stand-alone. The only "run-time environment" we care about is that the
> program can be executed (so, kernel can load it, glibc.i?86 exists,
> etc.). We tend to have very few if any dependencies beyond libc (and
> even then, beyond libc/libm/libpthread, we usually provide our own).

Then all you really need is:
* the 32-bit repository enabled,
* yum.conf set up not to install matching i686 packages for all x86_64
packages (which would cause file conflicts when using the full 32-bit
repository), but only those explicitly requested or required by dependencies
(This has now been the default for several Fedora releases anyway.),
* "yum install glibc.i686".

You don't actually need multilibbed x86_64 repositories.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-10-2010, 11:18 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Push scripts, mash (was: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

I wrote:

> * "yum install glibc.i686".

Actually, you probably want glibc-devel.i686. But my point still stands, as
long as you require only a few 32-bit packages, requesting them explicitly
is not the end of the world. So if we were to drop support for that "always
install all libs as multilibs" option and require explicitly picking the
wanted 32-bit stuff from the 32-bit repo, that shouldn't be a real issue for
you.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:57 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org