Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 12/20/21 12:39, Florian Weimer wrote: * Ben Cotton: This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check implementation] for more details. Would you please add a clear opt-out mechanism, and document the behavior and the mechanism in buildflags.md? Ok, I made this change: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/166 -Tom I can't tell right now how much is going to break because of this, but I think it's worth a try. Thanks, Florian ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 28/12/2021 13:17, Neal Gompa wrote: > > It is. There are plenty of packages that compile for tests. I have > > one, for example (libeconf). > > I think all compilation should be done in %build. > It is not always reasonably possible, though that is certainly ideal. A lot of packages compile their tests just-in-time when requested, rather than building them up front. The issue is that not every build mechanism stores the compiler flags in a persistent way for multiple stages. Autotools, CMake, and Meson do; but a lot of others don't. > > Why? If the package is being maintained as a single spec across > > multiple branches, you'd have to ask them to condition it, which is > > hard to do. Removing it would break it for packagers maintaining a > > single spec across branches, all for avoiding a redundant call. It'd > > be better to advise packagers to only use this for older Fedora and > > EPEL and let them fix it. > > I agree. I think %set_build_flags can be removed after Fedora 35 reaches > EOL. > Makes sense to me. It might be nice to somehow get this backported to EPEL, but I wouldn't impose this on the Change proposers. Might also be worth checking with the RHEL folks to see if it could be ported to CentOS Stream 9. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 28/12/2021 13:17, Neal Gompa wrote: It is. There are plenty of packages that compile for tests. I have one, for example (libeconf). I think all compilation should be done in %build. Why? If the package is being maintained as a single spec across multiple branches, you'd have to ask them to condition it, which is hard to do. Removing it would break it for packagers maintaining a single spec across branches, all for avoiding a redundant call. It'd be better to advise packagers to only use this for older Fedora and EPEL and let them fix it. I agree. I think %set_build_flags can be removed after Fedora 35 reaches EOL. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 3:26 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 20/12/2021 18:41, Ben Cotton wrote: > > Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the > > %build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will > > ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every > > RPM build. > > +1 for the %build section, but I doubt it is really needed for %check. > It is. There are plenty of packages that compile for tests. I have one, for example (libeconf). I would prefer it to be in %build, %check, and %install for completeness. > Also, owners of this proposal should use their proven packager abilities > to remove any existing %set_build_flags from all Fedora packages > (Rawhide branch). > Why? If the package is being maintained as a single spec across multiple branches, you'd have to ask them to condition it, which is hard to do. Removing it would break it for packagers maintaining a single spec across branches, all for avoiding a redundant call. It'd be better to advise packagers to only use this for older Fedora and EPEL and let them fix it. Mass changes are stupid hard, and packagers get upset with you no matter what you do with mass changes. I certainly learned that with my Change, and I'd rather not have people go through that and get burned out from the experience. So to me, the bar is extremely high to require mass changes. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 20/12/2021 18:41, Ben Cotton wrote: Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the %build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every RPM build. +1 for the %build section, but I doubt it is really needed for %check. Also, owners of this proposal should use their proven packager abilities to remove any existing %set_build_flags from all Fedora packages (Rawhide branch). -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
Dne 22. 12. 21 v 18:44 Tom Stellard napsal(a): On 12/22/21 01:56, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 21. 12. 21 v 21:56 Tom Stellard napsal(a): On 12/21/21 01:42, Vít Ondruch wrote: Hi Tom, Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with toolchains, this reminds me this dreaded issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684 In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time options and reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it be possible to generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set the environment variables and would be usable outside of rpmbuild? I think the only way to really generalize this is for the upstream projects to make it easier for distros to manually specify the flags for extensions rather than automatically taking the flags from the compiler invocation used to build the interpreter. I think this is limited POV. The issue is that the languages are actually providing services to their extensions. IOW the languages are doing a lot of probing for their build and they provides these results for their extensions, therefore the extensions don't need to do so much probing. And that is reasonable IMO. I wasn't suggesting modifying the extension flags directly. What I meant was that we should be able to specify a set of flags for extensions to use when we build python, for example. And then extensions would pick up those flags up the same way they do now via a config file, header, etc. But why? Really. Tell me why the extensions should use different flags? The issue we have is that the build system (mock, Koji) is using different flags (and configuration files) then the runtime system (any Fedora host) and we have no means to share them. That is the problem. Not that the extensions should use different flags. The problem is that everything is designed to be build on single system, which is not the case for binary distribution. Moreover, the binary distribution is using some flags for its build, but it does not offer any generic way to reuse these flags for builds done outside of the packaging environment. IOW if I install gcc on my system, it won't be using all the hardening and other flags Fedora itself is using for its build and that is something which should be improved IMO. I don't think it would be too difficult to install a spec file (not an RPM spec file, a gcc spec file) that contains the default Fedora flags. Then users could build with gcc -spec=fedora-flags to get the same set of flags. clang has a similar feature and could do the same thing. That would be certainly step int he right direction IMO. I don't think we should change the compiler defaults to match what Fedora does, though. This causes too many headaches for developers who are trying to support multiple distros. I don't necessarily argument to change the compiler defaults. But to support multiple distros, it would be certainly beneficial to have tool which would work (e.g.) similarly to `env` and would be able to provide the configuration which is used by Fedora or whatever different distro. And sorry for hijacking this change proposal. I am not against it per-se, I'd just like us to do even better ;) Vít -Tom Vít - Tom Also, Fedora sets all these flags for purpose, but we won't let our users to reuse them. So on top of my previous question, I wonder if we set these flags on the right place and if there would not be better to set them more broadly then just for RPMs. Vít Dne 20. 12. 21 v 18:41 Ben Cotton napsal(a): https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck == Summary == Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the %build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every RPM build. == Owner == * Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]] * Email: == Detailed Description == The %set_build_flags macro exports common environment variables used for building packages: * CFLAGS * CXXFLAGS * FFLAGS * FCFLAGS * LDFLAGS * LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH * CC * CXX These environment variables are set to the compiler flags defined in the system RPM configuration. This macro is currently implicitly called when packages use some of the build system helper macros, like %configure, %cmake, and %meson. However, not all packages use these macros and so some packages do not use the correct compiler flags as required by the Fedora packaging guidelines[1]. This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 22. 12. 21 18:44, Tom Stellard wrote: I wasn't suggesting modifying the extension flags directly. What I meant was that we should be able to specify a set of flags for extensions to use when we build python, for example. And then extensions would pick up those flags up the same way they do now via a config file, header, etc. Python already does that. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 12/22/21 01:56, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 21. 12. 21 v 21:56 Tom Stellard napsal(a):
On 12/21/21 01:42, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi Tom,
Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with toolchains,
this reminds me this dreaded issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684
In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time options and
reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it be possible to
generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set the environment variables
and would be usable outside of rpmbuild?
I think the only way to really generalize this is for the upstream projects to
make it easier for distros to manually specify the flags for extensions rather
than automatically taking the flags from the compiler invocation used to build
the interpreter.
I think this is limited POV. The issue is that the languages are actually
providing services to their extensions. IOW the languages are doing a lot of
probing for their build and they provides these results for their extensions,
therefore the extensions don't need to do so much probing. And that is
reasonable IMO.
I wasn't suggesting modifying the extension flags directly. What I meant was
that we should be able to specify a set of flags for extensions to use
when we build python, for example. And then extensions would pick up those
flags up the same way they do now via a config file, header, etc.
The problem is that everything is designed to be build on single system, which
is not the case for binary distribution.
Moreover, the binary distribution is using some flags for its build, but it
does not offer any generic way to reuse these flags for builds done outside of
the packaging environment. IOW if I install gcc on my system, it won't be using
all the hardening and other flags Fedora itself is using for its build and that
is something which should be improved IMO.
I don't think it would be too difficult to install a spec file (not an RPM spec
file,
a gcc spec file) that contains the default Fedora flags. Then users could build
with gcc -spec=fedora-flags to get the same set of flags. clang has a similar
feature
and could do the same thing.
I don't think we should change the compiler defaults to match what Fedora does,
though.
This causes too many headaches for developers who are trying to support
multiple distros.
-Tom
Vít
- Tom
Also, Fedora sets all these flags for purpose, but we won't let our users to
reuse them. So on top of my previous question, I wonder if we set these flags
on the right place and if there would not be better to set them more broadly
then just for RPMs.
Vít
Dne 20. 12. 21 v 18:41 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck
== Summary ==
Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every
RPM build.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The %set_build_flags macro exports common environment variables used
for building packages:
* CFLAGS
* CXXFLAGS
* FFLAGS
* FCFLAGS
* LDFLAGS
* LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH
* CC
* CXX
These environment variables are set to the compiler flags defined in
the system RPM configuration. This macro is currently implicitly
called when packages use some of the build system helper macros, like
%configure, %cmake, and %meson. However, not all packages use these
macros and so some packages do not use the correct compiler flags as
required by the Fedora packaging guidelines[1].
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed
[https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check
implementation] for more details.
The purpose for making this change in both the %build and %check
sections is because sometimes test code gets built in the %check
sections for unit tests and this will ensure that the application code
and its tests are built with the same set of flags.
This change should have no impact on packages that already use
%set_build_flags either directly or indirectly through another macro.
It also won't impact any package that currently sets these environment
variables or modifies any of the %{build*_flags} macros in their
%build or %check sections.
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags
== Benefit to Fedora ==
This change will ensure that more packages are built using the correct
compiler flags, and bring them in compliance with the Fedora packaging
guidelines. It will also help improve the security of the
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
Dne 21. 12. 21 v 21:56 Tom Stellard napsal(a):
On 12/21/21 01:42, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi Tom,
Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with
toolchains, this reminds me this dreaded issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684
In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time
options and reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would
it be possible to generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would
set the environment variables and would be usable outside of rpmbuild?
I think the only way to really generalize this is for the upstream
projects to
make it easier for distros to manually specify the flags for
extensions rather
than automatically taking the flags from the compiler invocation used
to build
the interpreter.
I think this is limited POV. The issue is that the languages are
actually providing services to their extensions. IOW the languages are
doing a lot of probing for their build and they provides these results
for their extensions, therefore the extensions don't need to do so much
probing. And that is reasonable IMO.
The problem is that everything is designed to be build on single system,
which is not the case for binary distribution.
Moreover, the binary distribution is using some flags for its build, but
it does not offer any generic way to reuse these flags for builds done
outside of the packaging environment. IOW if I install gcc on my system,
it won't be using all the hardening and other flags Fedora itself is
using for its build and that is something which should be improved IMO.
Vít
- Tom
Also, Fedora sets all these flags for purpose, but we won't let our
users to reuse them. So on top of my previous question, I wonder if
we set these flags on the right place and if there would not be
better to set them more broadly then just for RPMs.
Vít
Dne 20. 12. 21 v 18:41 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck
== Summary ==
Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every
RPM build.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The %set_build_flags macro exports common environment variables used
for building packages:
* CFLAGS
* CXXFLAGS
* FFLAGS
* FCFLAGS
* LDFLAGS
* LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH
* CC
* CXX
These environment variables are set to the compiler flags defined in
the system RPM configuration. This macro is currently implicitly
called when packages use some of the build system helper macros, like
%configure, %cmake, and %meson. However, not all packages use these
macros and so some packages do not use the correct compiler flags as
required by the Fedora packaging guidelines[1].
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed
[https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check
implementation] for more details.
The purpose for making this change in both the %build and %check
sections is because sometimes test code gets built in the %check
sections for unit tests and this will ensure that the application code
and its tests are built with the same set of flags.
This change should have no impact on packages that already use
%set_build_flags either directly or indirectly through another macro.
It also won't impact any package that currently sets these environment
variables or modifies any of the %{build*_flags} macros in their
%build or %check sections.
[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags
== Benefit to Fedora ==
This change will ensure that more packages are built using the correct
compiler flags, and bring them in compliance with the Fedora packaging
guidelines. It will also help improve the security of the
distribution as many of the compiler flags help defend against common
security attacks.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Make the necessary changes to redhat-rpm-config.
** Help debug any issues uncovered by this change during the mass
rebuild.
* Other developers:
** Report bugs to the proposal owner.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10482 #10482]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives:
== How To Test ==
This change will be tested by rebuilding packages as part of the
mass rebuild.
== User Experience ==
This change will make some packages less susceptible to security
exploits.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: The proposal owner will
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 12/21/21 01:42, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi Tom,
Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with toolchains,
this reminds me this dreaded issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684
In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time options and
reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it be possible to
generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set the environment variables
and would be usable outside of rpmbuild?
I think the only way to really generalize this is for the upstream projects to
make it easier for distros to manually specify the flags for extensions rather
than automatically taking the flags from the compiler invocation used to build
the interpreter.
- Tom
Also, Fedora sets all these flags for purpose, but we won't let our users to
reuse them. So on top of my previous question, I wonder if we set these flags
on the right place and if there would not be better to set them more broadly
then just for RPMs.
Vít
Dne 20. 12. 21 v 18:41 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck
== Summary ==
Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every
RPM build.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The %set_build_flags macro exports common environment variables used
for building packages:
* CFLAGS
* CXXFLAGS
* FFLAGS
* FCFLAGS
* LDFLAGS
* LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH
* CC
* CXX
These environment variables are set to the compiler flags defined in
the system RPM configuration. This macro is currently implicitly
called when packages use some of the build system helper macros, like
%configure, %cmake, and %meson. However, not all packages use these
macros and so some packages do not use the correct compiler flags as
required by the Fedora packaging guidelines[1].
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed
[https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check
implementation] for more details.
The purpose for making this change in both the %build and %check
sections is because sometimes test code gets built in the %check
sections for unit tests and this will ensure that the application code
and its tests are built with the same set of flags.
This change should have no impact on packages that already use
%set_build_flags either directly or indirectly through another macro.
It also won't impact any package that currently sets these environment
variables or modifies any of the %{build*_flags} macros in their
%build or %check sections.
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags
== Benefit to Fedora ==
This change will ensure that more packages are built using the correct
compiler flags, and bring them in compliance with the Fedora packaging
guidelines. It will also help improve the security of the
distribution as many of the compiler flags help defend against common
security attacks.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Make the necessary changes to redhat-rpm-config.
** Help debug any issues uncovered by this change during the mass rebuild.
* Other developers:
** Report bugs to the proposal owner.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10482 #10482]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives:
== How To Test ==
This change will be tested by rebuilding packages as part of the mass rebuild.
== User Experience ==
This change will make some packages less susceptible to security exploits.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: The proposal owner will revert the change in
redhat-rpm-config
* Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
* Blocks release? No
== Documentation ==
None needed.
___
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 on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
Dne 21. 12. 21 v 11:01 Florian Weimer napsal(a): * Vít Ondruch: Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with toolchains, this reminds me this dreaded issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684 In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time options and reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it be possible to generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set the environment variables and would be usable outside of rpmbuild? We have added %extension_… macros for the options that are safe to hard-code. But it doesn't solve the actual issue. The problem is not that it is difficult to get the flags, the issue is that we simply can't get the extension builders to move away from hard-coding them. If we add another mechanism, it will be as Fedora-specific as `rpm --eval %build_cflags` is today. That is why I call out Tom and every other toolchain developers to provide more generic solution :) We should not solve the issue just on packaging level, but also for other developers. Everybody (on Fedora, but also elsewhere) should be able to benefit from the hard work which went into figuring out the best set of build flags. Vít OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
* Vít Ondruch: > Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with > toolchains, this reminds me this dreaded issue: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684 > > In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time > options and reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it > be possible to generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set > the environment variables and would be usable outside of rpmbuild? We have added %extension_… macros for the options that are safe to hard-code. But it doesn't solve the actual issue. The problem is not that it is difficult to get the flags, the issue is that we simply can't get the extension builders to move away from hard-coding them. If we add another mechanism, it will be as Fedora-specific as `rpm --eval %build_cflags` is today. Thanks, Florian ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
Hi Tom,
Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with
toolchains, this reminds me this dreaded issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284684
In short, various languages, such as Ruby embeds the build time options
and reuse them for build of extensions. And I wonder, would it be
possible to generalize this e.g. into some tool, which would set the
environment variables and would be usable outside of rpmbuild?
Also, Fedora sets all these flags for purpose, but we won't let our
users to reuse them. So on top of my previous question, I wonder if we
set these flags on the right place and if there would not be better to
set them more broadly then just for RPMs.
Vít
Dne 20. 12. 21 v 18:41 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck
== Summary ==
Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every
RPM build.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The %set_build_flags macro exports common environment variables used
for building packages:
* CFLAGS
* CXXFLAGS
* FFLAGS
* FCFLAGS
* LDFLAGS
* LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH
* CC
* CXX
These environment variables are set to the compiler flags defined in
the system RPM configuration. This macro is currently implicitly
called when packages use some of the build system helper macros, like
%configure, %cmake, and %meson. However, not all packages use these
macros and so some packages do not use the correct compiler flags as
required by the Fedora packaging guidelines[1].
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed
[https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check
implementation] for more details.
The purpose for making this change in both the %build and %check
sections is because sometimes test code gets built in the %check
sections for unit tests and this will ensure that the application code
and its tests are built with the same set of flags.
This change should have no impact on packages that already use
%set_build_flags either directly or indirectly through another macro.
It also won't impact any package that currently sets these environment
variables or modifies any of the %{build*_flags} macros in their
%build or %check sections.
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags
== Benefit to Fedora ==
This change will ensure that more packages are built using the correct
compiler flags, and bring them in compliance with the Fedora packaging
guidelines. It will also help improve the security of the
distribution as many of the compiler flags help defend against common
security attacks.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Make the necessary changes to redhat-rpm-config.
** Help debug any issues uncovered by this change during the mass rebuild.
* Other developers:
** Report bugs to the proposal owner.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10482 #10482]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives:
== How To Test ==
This change will be tested by rebuilding packages as part of the mass rebuild.
== User Experience ==
This change will make some packages less susceptible to security exploits.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: The proposal owner will revert the change in
redhat-rpm-config
* Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
* Blocks release? No
== Documentation ==
None needed.
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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 on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
* Tom Stellard: > What do you think the best place is to document this? > I was thinking in the Packaging Guidelines: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags Please update the in-place package documentation (buildflags.md) at the very least. Thanks, Florian ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
* Miro Hrončok: > On 20. 12. 21 21:39, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Ben Cotton: >> >>> This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and >>> %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include >>> %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables >>> automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed >>> [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check >>> implementation] for more details. >> Would you please add a clear opt-out mechanism, and document the >> behavior and the mechanism in buildflags.md? >> I can't tell right now how much is going to break because of this, >> but I >> think it's worth a try. > > I suppose the obvious opt-out mechanism is to call unset on the > CFLAGS, LDFLAGS etc. Shell variables, no? We might introduce further variables in the future, so I'd prefer an explicit mechanism. We added LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH fairly recently, for example. Thanks, Florian ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 12/20/21 14:04, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 12. 21 21:39, Florian Weimer wrote: * Ben Cotton: This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check implementation] for more details. Would you please add a clear opt-out mechanism, and document the behavior and the mechanism in buildflags.md? I can't tell right now how much is going to break because of this, but I think it's worth a try. I suppose the obvious opt-out mechanism is to call unset on the CFLAGS, LDFLAGS etc. Shell variables, no? I agree it needs documentation. What do you think the best place is to document this? I was thinking in the Packaging Guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags -Tom ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 20. 12. 21 21:39, Florian Weimer wrote: * Ben Cotton: This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check implementation] for more details. Would you please add a clear opt-out mechanism, and document the behavior and the mechanism in buildflags.md? I can't tell right now how much is going to break because of this, but I think it's worth a try. I suppose the obvious opt-out mechanism is to call unset on the CFLAGS, LDFLAGS etc. Shell variables, no? I agree it needs documentation. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
* Ben Cotton: > This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and > %__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include > %set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables > automatically before the %build and %check sections. See the proposed > [https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/tstellar/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/c/a39741bbebd645c46e5d675920b4bffe390c95bb?branch=set-build-flags-build-check > implementation] for more details. Would you please add a clear opt-out mechanism, and document the behavior and the mechanism in buildflags.md? I can't tell right now how much is going to break because of this, but I think it's worth a try. Thanks, Florian ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 12/20/21 10:17, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 12. 21 18:41, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck == Summary == Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the %build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every RPM build. Should we also do this in %install for completeness? As in "just in case". Yes, this seems like a good idea. -Tom ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: %set_build_flags for %build and %check (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 20. 12. 21 18:41, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck == Summary == Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the %build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every RPM build. Should we also do this in %install for completeness? As in "just in case". -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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 on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
