Let's get an elfutils-debuginfod server up and running for the public fedora community. This will let developers/users fully debug/trace fedora software without have to do #sudo yum commands.
fedora-devel thread: https://email@example.com/thread/K54HO3X7ANUBFN4OQCQ4QBOYSR4HTSR5/
upstream project: https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html
Last year, in issue #7943, y'all kindly let us develop/test the software against the giant koji build archive. (In case that VM has survived the fedora move, please feel free to release its resources.) Our team has operated a public-facing internet service for some time since, and the software seems to be reasonably stable and useful.
There are a bunch of issues to talk through with your team, if y'all are interested, with regards to resources & security & approach. Should I summarize them in writing here, or at some meeting verbally? We would be pleased to install / operate / maintain the server, given koji-proximate resources & access.
The gist of it: a server instance is unprivileged; takes barely any CPU (except when on-the-fly decompressing large RPMs), say ~16GB RAM, an index sqlite db of ~3% of the storage used by the RPM files it is configured to serve; is easily partitioned by architecture or other filename-regex expressible properties; is replicable; its own data is disposable (the index is a cache); the index db could be shared across instances;
We decided to consider this as an initiative, pinging @amoloney @lgriffin to start the initiatives process.
Metadata Update from @mohanboddu:
- Issue tagged with: medium-gain, medium-trouble
Metadata Update from @smooge:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on External (was: Needs Review)
Considering the outcome of the discussion on the devel list. What do we want to do about this ticket?
If it's worth doing then as suggested, it is likely worth of an initiative and thus should be discussed with @amoloney.
Otherwise, should we close this ticket?
I got the instructions on how to make an initiative and am working with the requester on that. I would like to keep this ticket open for at least one more week as it is what is referred to in the initial documents and it isn't clear if the process will push it back to this.
We also may want to hear back from @fche if they want to look at just adding this on to the existing retrace/faf server. If they go that way it could largely be handled by that team.
@kevin, we're going to talk with the retrace/faf folks early next week to see if there is an opportunity to share hardware for example.
Checking in with news that we did talk with @msuchy of the retrace/faf folks. Brief findings:
With respect to the fedora-initiative process, IMHO we should go ahead with it independently of all this. e.g. security aspects still need a good airing-out. The longer term future may be a smaller abrtd that becomes a client of debuginfod, where they happen to run together in the same VM, maybe with repurposed storage.
to comment on this ticket.