On 8/13/20 10:02 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > 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 > hmmm .. got cut off .. We are working on a public mirror of the koji files .. they should be downloadable from there when it is available. I don't know when that is going to happen. Attend the next CPE community meeting and ask: https://blog.centos.org/2020/07/cpe-weekly-2020-07-25/ -------------- 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/b46bcc37/attachment-0006.sig>