On 8/12/20 2:01 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote: > Am 12.08.20 um 16:55 schrieb Johnny Hughes: >> On 8/11/20 12:10 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 7:57 AM Troy Dawson <tdawson at redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 7:39 AM Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 8/10/20 3:41 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 1:29 PM Orion Poplawski <orion at nwra.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there anything I can do to help out with missing -devel >>>>>>> packages in CentOS >>>>>>> 8? I'm waiting for a number of them, e.g.: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=17401 >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Orion, >>>>>> It helps if it is linked to this ticket. >>>>>> https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16492 >>>>>> Although nothing has happened there for 5 months. >>>>>> >>>>>> To be clear, there is two definitions of "missing -devel packages" >>>>>> >>>>>> There are the ones that have never shown up anywhere (I'm still >>>>>> waiting on 4 I believe) >>>>>> >>>>>> And then there are the ones that originally showed up, and we were >>>>>> able to build from them in EPEL8, but then when RHEL 8.2 came along, >>>>>> the EPEL8 packages are still the old ones from RHEL 8.1. >>>>>> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9580 >>>>> >>>>> And while we would love to just publish these .. we can not. >>>>> >>>>> There are competing goals here. Bit for bit like RHEL .. RHEL does >>>>> not >>>>> have the SRPMS, we should not. >>>>> >>>>> Someone wants the SRPMS .. so they want us to like RHEL .. except when >>>>> they don't. All our build system and where we pull info assumes we >>>>> need >>>>> to be the same. Introducing things were we are not is HARD .. >>>>> especially in el8 as we HAVE to use koji and mbox and pungi to build. >>>>> Introducing differences into compose configurations for pungi for >>>>> releases is HARD .. it has follow on impacts .. and we need a >>>>> system in >>>>> place to make it continue to work when we get updated compose files in >>>>> the future. >>>>> >>>>> We have people working on this, but it is just not a priority compared >>>>> to getting things released on time and builds working properly. It is >>>>> not just a simple .. push a couple packages somewhere. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You already have them published, that work is done. >>>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8/Devel/x86_64/os/Packages/ >>>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8.2.2004/Devel/x86_64/os/Packages/ >>>> >>>> It doesn't say it in the ticket, but from conversations the rsync area >>>> that was setup for EPEL8 to sync that over, something happened and >>>> they can't sync anymore. >>>> I don't know the details. It's possible that the syncing is already >>>> fixed, and they just need to restart and/or update their script. >>>> >>>> Troy >>> >>> Turns out the syncing was fixed, but the ticket not closed. >>> Sorry for all the noise. >>> If I had just tried to rebuild my package again, I would have seen it >>> was fixed. >>> >>> Troy >> >> Thanks Troy .. as i said, we did get SOME packages added and they SHOULD >> stay fixed. >> >> But some -devel packages are also not fixed, as there are lots of things >> that need to be modified in the automation to keep them fixed. > > > I am not so deep in this "koji mbox pungi" infra thing but like other > devel packages, they are also the output of the build process and > survive the repo build, so why not letting them also there where they > already are? I can not believe that this is hardcoded in "koji mbox > pungi" :-)? > > Ok, the argument is - RHEL is ... and CentOS will be also so. Okay. > (Side note does Upstream have a rhelplus like centosplus repo? So, > no justification to have not an full populated Devel repo?) > > While the packages are _actively_ deleted (process step before repo > build). Why not substitute "rm $1" with "mv -t Devel $1". > An automatic process and no need to request packages, like here: > > https://bugs.centos.org/view_all_set.php?sort_add=category_id&dir_add=DESC&type=2 > > > The most requests for such devel packages are done because people are > building others packages that depend on (BuildRequires) also CentOS need > them. Well, they are devel rpms right. But what I wanted to say is they > are mostly not requested to get installed for ever and maybe produce bug > reports etc. (exactly this case is not supported, claimed by upstream). > > BTW, you already do the right thing in putting a warning into the > reponame/file. > > Building the SRPM is straight forward and the people have then the > missing devel packages. So why this hassle? > > As I said, I do not know the internal process. Its just my mental model > that gets here depicted from a point of view outside of the project. If I was the decider .. any -devel package that comes out would signed and released .. I am not the decider. I don't decide what gets in RHEL -devel files .. nor do i decide what gets released from pungi .. but it matches what is released in RHEL with approved additional -devel files. That is just how it is. We are working on a -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200813/be49c7c5/attachment-0006.sig>