[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Rebuilds needed for Fedora 8



There are currently two technical issues that require rebuilding of
packages.

1) a bad binutils was used in buildroots for almost two months that
caused all ppc32 binaries to need execmem.  SELinux rightfully denies
this.  We need to rebuild the effected packages so that ppc and SELinux
work again.

2) build-id (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBuildId)
Any binary package with a debuginfo package that hasn't been built
after the good build-id stuff landed needs to be rebuilt so that it has
a build-id.

The unique combination of these two has led to a list of 2845 packages
that will need to be rebuilt.
(http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/really-need-to-rebuild)  That's 598
packages that need rebuilding for the ppc32 issue, and 2831 that need
building due to the build-id issue (there is obviously some crossover).

At the absolute minimum we need the ppc32 builds done before Test2,
which has a freeze date in one week.  We'd /like/ to have them all done
as build-id is an important feature of Fedora 8 and Test2 is the
Feature Freeze and if you're building 600 packages, might as well build
3K.

A less technical but a nonetheless important rebuild issue is correct
package licensing.  We have a goal to have all our packages with (a)
correct License(s) tag in the spec file, and a build with that correct
tag.  I do not have the numbers currently as to how many still need
updating, it is not a small number.  Also important to note is that for
the above technical issues no changes are needed in the package beyond
a release bump and a build.  But for the license tag issue there is a
significant number of packages that still have the invalid license and
need auditing and changing.

Given that with just the fully technical issues we're at just a bit
over 1/2 the package set for Fedora we've got some hard choices to
make.  Obviously we'd like to rely upon the maintainers to rebuild
their packages, however with just a week to accomplish this that may be
nearly impossible.  It's also a rather large number of packages to try
and automate over, with a large degree of different $release values to
try and automatically bump (especially without resorting to just
plonking a ".1" to the end of everything which is against the
guidelines).  There is also a rather large list of things that failed
to rebuild during Matt Domsch's last rebuild test, and I don't know how
many of those have been fixed.  That can cause some delays as well.

So I ask you, great Fedora Community, how do we want to handle this
situation?  I'm open for suggestions, but we should decide something
before the end of the day given our time constraints.

I'm going to continue working on these lists and keeping them updated,
perhaps getting a mapping of maintainer to package, or whatever format
the community finds useful.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]