#8129 Changes/BuildRequires Generators
Opened 3 months ago by ignatenkobrain. Modified a month ago

Describe the issue

Please take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators.

This will definitely affect releng, although I'm not entirely sure in which way (apart from installing latest mock on builders). Also it would probably mean that src.rpm won't contain all required dependencies, but rather somnething like rust-packaging. That means, it would be still possible to build packages from same SRPM, but probably won't be enough to query.. This is still under discussion in upstream RPM/mock how we will handle this. If you have any specific requirement, let me know.

When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD)

ASAP, as usual.

When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD)

It is really useful, trust me in it!

If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact?

Fedora will stuck in old century =(


@ignatenkobrain Two things I am worried about:

  1. src.rpm will not have all the dependencies, that means RelEng cannot (in future) will be able to dep solve it and use it to run mass rebuilds (although it seems like a far-fetched idea even now with out limitations)

  2. Reproducability - I know you said it is do-able in the description, but I want to emphasize it more that we absolutely need that feature.

src.rpm will not have all the dependencies, that means RelEng cannot (in future) will be able to dep solve it and use it to run mass rebuilds (although it seems like a far-fetched idea even now with out limitations)

well, we can work this out somehow.. Probably write back src.rpm with deps... But those requires might change next time you do a build. Although you will be able to do mass rebuild as you perform today and everything should continue work.

Reproducibility - I know you said it is do-able in the description, but I want to emphasize it more that we absolutely need that feature.

Well, there is nothing right now in Fedora what can prove that package builds are reproducible ;)

As long as you have same packages in buildroot and as long as dependency generators return reproducible output and as long as dependency solver does reproducible thing, everything will be okay.. We just add one more piece inside (dependency generators), the rest is like today.

I think this upstream discussion deserves to be linked in this context:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/104
(was myself struggling with a missing pre-BuildRequires step).

Metadata Update from @mohanboddu:
- Issue tagged with: changes, f31

2 months ago

The only concern that I had is if its going to replace the hardcoded explicit BuildRequires.

Something like

BuildRequires: foo > 1.2.3-4

If its not going to replace it, then that should be okay.

As per @ignatenkobrain on irc, it will preserve these deps.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata