On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 11:24 AM Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Reading through the feedback, wouldn't it be better to take a second > look on the previous change: > > > Dne 24. 06. 25 v 12:02 Aoife Moloney via devel-announce napsal(a): > > Since Fedora 37, leaf packages (i.e. packages that are not depended on > > by other packages) can simply > > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval stop > > building for i686] without any reason, which has allowed package > > maintainers to focus their work on architectures where packages are > > actually shipped to users. > > > > While it encourages removal of i686, I think that nobody was ever really > serious about this.
Yes, because it's not trivial ... I wrote https://pagure.io/leafdrop to help packagers with this, but (see below) its guidance is imperfect. > For example, I maintain Ruby and I have not disabled i686 build, because > there are other packages depending on Ruby. I don't think that they are > used, but I am not going to do the review. To a first approximation, I don't think you could disable i686 support in ruby right now: - noarch rubygems shouldn't be a problem, noarch builds haven't been scheduled to run on i686 for a while already - rubygems with binary extensions would be a problem, they would need to add ExclusiveArch: %{ruby_arches} - any non-noarch packages that depend on ruby (either at build-time or at run-time) would need to add ExclusiveArch: %{ruby_arches} too > Alternatively, I could have disable the i686 build of Ruby, but I'm not > sure who would fix the FTBFS packages. > > Granted, there is no tooling which would make this easy. This proposal > kind of workarounds this ... Yes - because it's not easy to determine which packages we'd need to keep and which could be thrown away - the way koji works throws away some information we would need for that. Only one SRPM from one random architecture is kept, and there is only one "-source" repository that contains these randomized SRPMs - so there are *zero* ways to get complete dependency information about BuildRequires and Requires for any architecture. If we *had* this information, we could do some graph algorithm magic and determine the minimal self-hosting set of packages needed for i686, and drop everything else. But we *don't* have this complete and correct information, so any conclusions drawn from the information we have will be imperfect. It might still be worthwhile to do it - it just won't be 100% accurate. Fabio -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
