Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-26 Thread Carlos O'Donell 
On 07/09/2018 07:03 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> today we finally dropped gcc and gcc-c++ from the buildroot
> .
> This made 12 packages go away along with 134MB installed size. This
> means that you need to add gcc/gcc-c++ in the BuildRequires
> (guidelines stated this for few years but not many were following
> them).

Great job!

In November 2015 (almost 3 years now) we added this requirement to
the packaging guidelines specifically for C and C++ :-)

"Packaging:C and C++"
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B

Cheers,
CArlos.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/DU4I4FPN4WAOB4PMK6LBOMHHP6WTHBBQ/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-24 Thread Kevin Fenzi 
On 07/23/2018 01:47 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:

> 
> The question is not about Fedora comps, but about comps from the Koji
> repository:
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/
> 
> specifically:
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml
> 
> Where are these coming from? How to fix them? I'd love to see the
> examples above to behave correctly, i.e. to not install gcc.

As you can see if you look it notes those are generated by koji.

koji has a 'groups' concept. It uses different groups for different
things. There's a srpm-build group that it uses when building the
initial src.rpm, there's a build group it uses for building, etc.

We had removed gcc/gcc-c++ from the f29-build tags groups, but not the
f29/rawhide tag. I have now done so, so this should hopefully be fixed
in a few here.

> 
> I opened releng ticket to track this: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7649

Marked it fixed now. Thanks!

kevin



signature.asc
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RXCL5SM753MDJL6DOCH2ID6HLL5QWL36/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-23 Thread Tomasz Kłoczko 
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 at 15:50, Igor Gnatenko
 wrote:
[..]
>> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 00:17, Igor Gnatenko
>>  wrote:
>> [..]
>> > F29:
>> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
>> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
>> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>>
>> Igor can you post full list of packages about F29?
>
> Can you describe which list of packages you are asking for?

I've been asking about names of those 144 packages.
As long as concern about used disk space used during Fedora packages
builds was main reason of introduction direct BRs for C/C++ compiler
I'm 100% sure that it is possible to reduce even more such minimal
packages set.
Simple it would be good to have look on this list and I'm sure that
between many of those packages from such minimal list are some
dependencies which could removed/corrected to allow form even smaller
list.
Second propose of publishing names of those packages is to probably
tweak list of current BRs as it is not possible to build even simplest
package without any of those packages.

Just please post here result of the command like "rpm -qa --qf
'%{NAME}\n' | sort | xargs"

kloczek
--
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PNZTFSTBINCC2EANARKP42BPOAUKDTIH/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-23 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 3:43 PM Tomasz Kłoczko 
wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 00:17, Igor Gnatenko
>  wrote:
> [..]
> > F29:
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>
> Igor can you post full list of packages about F29?


Can you describe which list of packages you are asking for?

kloczek
> --
> Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OZRXVFVMXISFTAIIPY6ECBLKVXMX2HUA/
>
-- 

-Igor Gnatenko
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PSZOZXGK4VW2LPGO77OHLJH7E2SWT4LB/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-23 Thread Tomasz Kłoczko 
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 00:17, Igor Gnatenko
 wrote:
[..]
> F29:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M

Igor can you post full list of packages about F29?

kloczek
-- 
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OZRXVFVMXISFTAIIPY6ECBLKVXMX2HUA/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-23 Thread Vít Ondruch 


Dne 10.7.2018 v 19:31 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On 07/10/2018 03:36 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:22 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for pushing this forward!
>>>
>>>
>>> One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test
>>> this locally it does not work.
>>>
>>> 1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
>>> --enablerepo=local
>>>
>>> This still installs gcc.
>>>
>>> 2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
>>> --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=local
>>>
>>> This fails:
>>>
>>> ~~~
>>>
>>> Warning: Module or Group 'buildsys-build' does not exist.
>>> Error: Nothing to do.
>>>
>>> ~~~
>>>
>>> Trying to get the latest comps from local repository:
>>>
>>> ~~~
>>>
>>>
>>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml
>>>
>>> ~~~
>>>
>>> This has "build" group which references gcc/gcc-c++ and does not reference
>>> any buildsys-build group. So where is this file coming from? Why does it
>>> differ from regular Fedora repos?
>>>
>> This is  interesting question. I've sent PR to update comps
>> ,
>> but I don't know how it is being pushed through… We should ask rel-eng to
>> help with this.
>>
>> Mohan, Kevin?
> Looks like Mohan merged it a while back now...

The question is not about Fedora comps, but about comps from the Koji
repository:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/

specifically:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml

Where are these coming from? How to fix them? I'd love to see the
examples above to behave correctly, i.e. to not install gcc.

I opened releng ticket to track this: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7649


V.



signature.asc
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IMBW5D7SNRWBQ2YMCYMUDBFV4Q44P4YQ/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Kevin Fenzi 
On 07/10/2018 03:36 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:22 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> 
>> Thank you for pushing this forward!
>>
>>
>> One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test
>> this locally it does not work.
>>
>> 1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
>> --enablerepo=local
>>
>> This still installs gcc.
>>
>> 2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
>> --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=local
>>
>> This fails:
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> Warning: Module or Group 'buildsys-build' does not exist.
>> Error: Nothing to do.
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> Trying to get the latest comps from local repository:
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>>
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> This has "build" group which references gcc/gcc-c++ and does not reference
>> any buildsys-build group. So where is this file coming from? Why does it
>> differ from regular Fedora repos?
>>
> This is  interesting question. I've sent PR to update comps
> ,
> but I don't know how it is being pushed through… We should ask rel-eng to
> help with this.
> 
> Mohan, Kevin?

Looks like Mohan merged it a while back now...

kevin




signature.asc
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IY2ZSKEVS6BLDCWDCXBR5QW2KSR6SEQ2/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:22 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:

> Thank you for pushing this forward!
>
>
> One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test
> this locally it does not work.
>
> 1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
> --enablerepo=local
>
> This still installs gcc.
>
> 2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
> --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=local
>
> This fails:
>
> ~~~
>
> Warning: Module or Group 'buildsys-build' does not exist.
> Error: Nothing to do.
>
> ~~~
>
> Trying to get the latest comps from local repository:
>
> ~~~
>
>
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml
>
> ~~~
>
> This has "build" group which references gcc/gcc-c++ and does not reference
> any buildsys-build group. So where is this file coming from? Why does it
> differ from regular Fedora repos?
>
This is  interesting question. I've sent PR to update comps
,
but I don't know how it is being pushed through… We should ask rel-eng to
help with this.

Mohan, Kevin?

>
> Thx
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
>
> Dne 10.7.2018 v 01:03 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a):
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> today we finally dropped gcc and gcc-c++ from the buildroot
> . This
> made 12 packages go away along with 134MB installed size. This means that
> you need to add gcc/gcc-c++ in the BuildRequires (guidelines stated this
> for few years but not many were following them).
>
> Also Mark fixed bug today which was pulling in systemd in the buildroot
> which was pulling gnutls/libgcrypt/nettle and stuff like that. I don't have
> exact numbers what we saved here.
>
> But looking into simple package build for f28 and f29 I see some nice
> trend.
>
> F28:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
>
> F29:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>
> ---
> Thanks for attention!
> --
>
> -Igor Gnatenko
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TDPFN4KWRZNGGLS4PGWDRFHRKFLVOHXA/
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ENPIJVO2Y7374F6UNTXG2LXR7UOQ7SQH/
>
-- 

-Igor Gnatenko
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X7HNNFDUUA3ZBBEY6MDL3PG3CXQNIJWM/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Mikolaj Izdebski 
On 07/10/2018 12:14 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Thank you for pushing this forward!
> 
> 
> One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test
> this locally it does not work.

It should work with config generated with "koji mock-config" command:

  koji mock-config --tag f29-build --arch x86_64 >my.cfg
  mock -r ./my.cfg [...]

-- 
Mikolaj Izdebski
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/3NU5ZSNJDQTH4HD7RNZNZXLKKDOSTYDP/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 2:17 AM Tomasz Kłoczko 
wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 01:02, Tomasz Kłoczko 
> wrote:
> [..]
> > > F28:
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
> > >
> > > F29:
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> > > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
> >
> > I'm almost 100% sure that it would be possible to save probably more
> > by remove generate Requires dependencies using {Lib,Requires}.private
> > out of .pc files (..)
>
> Yet another question..
> Did above storage used sizes are when all packages are installed with
> --excludedocs and --define="%_install_langs en,C"?
>

No. While we can probably assume that no one needs docs, the install_langs
is dangerous. See the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_glibc-langpacks-all_from_buildroot
for existing proposal.
-- 

-Igor Gnatenko
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VUUPHVNI4HE3KXQ24I4K24BL32N5ZO6P/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 2:12 AM Tomasz Kłoczko 
wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 00:17, Igor Gnatenko
>  wrote:
> [..]
> > But looking into simple package build for f28 and f29 I see some nice
> trend.
> >
> > F28:
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
> >
> > F29:
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>
> I'm almost 100% sure that it would be possible to save probably more
> by remove generate Requires dependencies using {Lib,Requires}.private
> out of .pc files (which are for static linking which is not possible
> to use on Fedora because only few devel packages provides static
> libraries) than generate 1.7k git changes and remove gcc from minimal
> set of packages. Not to mention that similar effect would be possible
> to reach by add gcc to glibc-devel and gcc-g++ to libbstdc++-devel
> requires.
>

I don't disagree with you. Moreover, I support this idea, but the problem
here is that you don't have way to say "hey, here is -static subpackage
which owns this .pc file, can you add auto-generated dependencies there?".
Once someone implements this in RPM (I would appreciate this because I have
use-case for Rust packages), we can submit Change Proposal and


> Just one technical question about forming stub Fedora build env
> (because I don't know how it is assembled).
> How it is done? Just one time by create minimal build image after add
> some set of new updates to official repository than snapshot and clone
> such image and use it as base on start build all new packages until
> next batch of packages will be pushed to repo used by build systems or
> every time which comes new build request such build env is assembled
> from scratch?
> Using for example btrfs and snapshosts would be possible to start
> adding all packages listed in BR instantly. Total storage overhead
> will be only ~150MB and nothing would be necessary to download to
> assemble such base build env. Cleanup all after finished build .. just
> remove shanpshot.
>

Every build it is generating new build environment. I also agree that
creating snapshot would be nice, but this is not implemented. If you would
like to work on this - I would appreciate that. In any case, you need to
talk to Koji  developers.
-- 

-Igor Gnatenko
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4FUC2JOCZXVQJLTULUDCSQITCBB62F5N/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Mathieu Bridon 
Hi,

On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 12:14 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to
> test this locally it does not work.
> 1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
> --enablerepo=local
> This still installs gcc.
> 2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
> --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=local
> This fails:
> ~~~
> Warning: Module or Group 'buildsys-build' does not exist.
> Error: Nothing to do.
> ~~~
> Trying to get the latest comps from local repository:
> ~~~
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repoda
> ta/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-
> comps.xml
> ~~~
> This has "build" group which references gcc/gcc-c++ and does not
> reference any buildsys-build group. So where is this file coming
> from? Why does it differ from regular Fedora repos?

The groups in Koji are defined differently from the groups in the
Fedora repos.

In the repos, you can find them defined in the comps.xml file, for
example:

http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/28/Everything/x86
_64/os/repodata/b140b2b55e06b7ba6c765d27dd9dbae905745e788a97a390be8b829
80b8c282e-comps-Everything.x86_64.xml

This contains a `buildsys-build` group, which mock installs when
creating a chroot.

In Koji, the groups can be seen with the command:

$ koji list-groups f29-build
[… snip …]
build  [f29]
  bash: None, mandatory  [f29]
  bzip2: None, mandatory  [f29]
  coreutils: None, mandatory  [f29]
  cpio: None, mandatory  [f29]
  diffutils: None, mandatory  [f29]
  fedora-release: None, mandatory  [f29]
  findutils: None, mandatory  [f29]
  gawk: None, mandatory  [f29]
  grep: None, mandatory  [f29]
  gzip: None, mandatory  [f29]
  info: None, mandatory  [f29]
  make: None, mandatory  [f29]
  patch: None, mandatory  [f29]
  redhat-rpm-config: None, mandatory  [f29]
  rpm-build: None, mandatory  [f29]
  sed: None, mandatory  [f29]
  shadow-utils: None, mandatory  [f29]
  tar: None, mandatory  [f29]
  unzip: None, mandatory  [f29]
  util-linux: None, mandatory  [f29]
  which: None, mandatory  [f29]
  xz: None, mandatory  [f29]
[… snip …]
srpm-build  [f29]
  bash: None, mandatory  [f29]
  fedora-release: None, mandatory  [f29]
  fedpkg-minimal: None, mandatory  [f29]
  gnupg2: None, mandatory  [f29]
  redhat-rpm-config: None, mandatory  [f29]
  rpm-build: None, mandatory  [f29]
  shadow-utils: None, mandatory  [f29]

The `srpm-build` group is what gets installed in the chroot to build
the SRPM (see the buildSRPMFromSCM subtask in any build task) and the
`build` group is what gets installed when building binary RPMs (see the
buildArch subtasks in any build task).

I do not know **why** we have this difference between Koji and the main
repos, I just know that we do have it.

This change needs to be reflected in Comps, so that Mock installs the
same thing in its buildroots as Koji.


-- 
Mathieu
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TB4YLBIHDCNORB4MHSAUVT2HXXN4MNAQ/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-10 Thread Vít Ondruch 
Thank you for pushing this forward!


One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test
this locally it does not work.

1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
--enablerepo=local

This still installs gcc.

2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm
--disablerepo=* --enablerepo=local

This fails:

~~~

Warning: Module or Group 'buildsys-build' does not exist.
Error: Nothing to do.

~~~

Trying to get the latest comps from local repository:

~~~

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/rawhide/latest/x86_64/repodata/db824c6dd6664943bcec0a8fcd3bda7fc855e5a787623c0da6d49deb79438fc7-comps.xml

~~~

This has "build" group which references gcc/gcc-c++ and does not
reference any buildsys-build group. So where is this file coming from?
Why does it differ from regular Fedora repos?


Thx


Vít




Dne 10.7.2018 v 01:03 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a):
> Hello everyone,
>
> today we finally dropped gcc and gcc-c++ from the buildroot
> .
> This made 12 packages go away along with 134MB installed size. This
> means that you need to add gcc/gcc-c++ in the BuildRequires
> (guidelines stated this for few years but not many were following them).
>
> Also Mark fixed bug today which was pulling in systemd in the
> buildroot which was pulling gnutls/libgcrypt/nettle and stuff like
> that. I don't have exact numbers what we saved here.
>
> But looking into simple package build for f28 and f29 I see some nice
> trend.
>
> F28:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
>
> F29:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>
> ---
> Thanks for attention!
> -- 
>
> -Igor Gnatenko
>
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TDPFN4KWRZNGGLS4PGWDRFHRKFLVOHXA/

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ENPIJVO2Y7374F6UNTXG2LXR7UOQ7SQH/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-09 Thread Tomasz Kłoczko 
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 01:02, Tomasz Kłoczko  wrote:
[..]
> > F28:
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
> >
> > F29:
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M
>
> I'm almost 100% sure that it would be possible to save probably more
> by remove generate Requires dependencies using {Lib,Requires}.private
> out of .pc files (..)

Yet another question..
Did above storage used sizes are when all packages are installed with
--excludedocs and --define="%_install_langs en,C"?

kloczek
-- 
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OARHP4VWFD2BQGKKT5PNCE2GZ6RGWXU4/

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-09 Thread Tomasz Kłoczko 
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 00:17, Igor Gnatenko
 wrote:
[..]
> But looking into simple package build for f28 and f29 I see some nice trend.
>
> F28:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M
>
> F29:
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
> DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M

I'm almost 100% sure that it would be possible to save probably more
by remove generate Requires dependencies using {Lib,Requires}.private
out of .pc files (which are for static linking which is not possible
to use on Fedora because only few devel packages provides static
libraries) than generate 1.7k git changes and remove gcc from minimal
set of packages. Not to mention that similar effect would be possible
to reach by add gcc to glibc-devel and gcc-g++ to libbstdc++-devel
requires.

Just one technical question about forming stub Fedora build env
(because I don't know how it is assembled).
How it is done? Just one time by create minimal build image after add
some set of new updates to official repository than snapshot and clone
such image and use it as base on start build all new packages until
next batch of packages will be pushed to repo used by build systems or
every time which comes new build request such build env is assembled
from scratch?
Using for example btrfs and snapshosts would be possible to start
adding all packages listed in BR instantly. Total storage overhead
will be only ~150MB and nothing would be necessary to download to
assemble such base build env. Cleanup all after finished build .. just
remove shanpshot.

kloczek
-- 
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IRODY3SWVSU6KZ2DGCD53XGQHQMSQCWA/

[HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

2018-07-09 Thread Igor Gnatenko 
Hello everyone,

today we finally dropped gcc and gcc-c++ from the buildroot
. This
made 12 packages go away along with 134MB installed size. This means that
you need to add gcc/gcc-c++ in the BuildRequires (guidelines stated this
for few years but not many were following them).

Also Mark fixed bug today which was pulling in systemd in the buildroot
which was pulling gnutls/libgcrypt/nettle and stuff like that. I don't have
exact numbers what we saved here.

But looking into simple package build for f28 and f29 I see some nice trend.

F28:
DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  179 Packages
DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 146 M
DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 570 M

F29:
DEBUG util.py:439:  Install  144 Packages
DEBUG util.py:439:  Total download size: 87 M
DEBUG util.py:439:  Installed size: 425 M

---
Thanks for attention!
-- 

-Igor Gnatenko
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TDPFN4KWRZNGGLS4PGWDRFHRKFLVOHXA/