Bug 1703542

Note that the rust crate dependencies are vendored here. Initially, efforts were made to use crates packaged in Fedora, and we are close to this, however a number of dependencies still need to be packaged [1]. We would like to have Afterburn available in Fedora CoreOS and sourced from the Fedora stable repo quite soon (within the next month or so) in time to release a preview of Fedora CoreOS [2], and believe that vendoring the dependencies is easiest for now. Later on, we plan to use the RPM-packaged crates for the dependencies.

(In reply to Robert Fairley from comment #1)
> Note that the rust crate dependencies are vendored here. Initially, efforts
> were made to use crates packaged in Fedora, and we are close to this,
> however a number of dependencies still need to be packaged [1]. We would
> like to have Afterburn available in Fedora CoreOS and sourced from the
> Fedora stable repo quite soon (within the next month or so) in time to
> release a preview of Fedora CoreOS [2], and believe that vendoring the
> dependencies is easiest for now. Later on, we plan to use the RPM-packaged
> crates for the dependencies.

Apologies, these should refer to:

[1] https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/di3MmbCetHvIE3XSetxe4A
[2] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/4

Created attachment 1559307 [details]
Afterburn packaging crates list (slightly outdated)

Attaching the crate dependencies list as a file [1] https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/di3MmbCetHvIE3XSetxe4A as the paste will expire.

How many dependencies are we talking about?

I think the only pieces which are missing are:

* mockito (somebody is packaging it, not sure how successful -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1698710)
* pnet (requires porting to syn/quote, upstream would be happy to take a patch -- https://github.com/libpnet/libpnet/issues/355)
* reqwest (needs to be updated in Fedora, you can probably relax version unless you are using features from 0.9.15+)
* slog-scope (either needs to be ported to arc-swap or old crossbeam has to be added to fedora -- https://github.com/slog-rs/scope/pull/7)
* update-ssh-keys (optional, easy to package)

The rest I have packaged and added as dependencies for this bug.

---

So the only big thing is porting pnet... And I'm pretty sure you can spend some time working on it :)

And even with pnet, there is quite easy workaround.. Just depend on pnet_datalink and pnet_base directly (since you are using functions only from those). None of those needs syntex_*.

Created attachment 1559504 [details]
use-pnet-subcrates-directly.diff

Folks,

I have imported this in separate bugzilla with fixed packaging (no bundling, systemd scriptlets and such). I've added Robert as an admin to the repo.

Let me know if you will need this in F28/F29/F30. In that case we will need to create a module and such.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1703775 ***

Forgot to mention Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=34505881

@Igor, awesome thanks *so much* for getting this through quickly. :)

> Let me know if you will need this in F28/F29/F30.

Yes, we'll need this for F30.

> In that case we will need to create a module and such.

Gotcha. Should we file a separate bug for this? Is there a tool for generating the modulemd automatically?

@Igor - thank you so much!

Thanks very much @Igor for getting this in to Fedora!

I requested an f30 branch for `rpms/rust-afterburn` [1], an `afterburn` module [2], and an f30 branch for that module [3]:

[1] https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/11484
[2] https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/11485
[3] https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/11486

I think for a tool to generate the modulemd, we could try this: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/modularity/making-modules/defining-modules/#_using_fedmod? Will give this a go.

Ugh. Please don't request f30 branches ever. They are not needed and you won't be able to do anything with it.

First thing you need to decide on how you are going to push updates. Are you planning to support "4.x", then "5.x" at the same time? Or you are planning to constantly update?

You can use http://pagure.io/fedora-rust/modularity-utils to generate yaml

(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #13)
> Ugh. Please don't request f30 branches ever. They are not needed and you
> won't be able to do anything with it.

Talked with igor. Looks like if we are building in a module with crates from
rawhide it will auto build for f29, f30, f31 etc..

> 
> First thing you need to decide on how you are going to push updates. Are you
> planning to support "4.x", then "5.x" at the same time? Or you are planning
> to constantly update?

Just `latest` AFAIU.

> 
> You can use http://pagure.io/fedora-rust/modularity-utils to generate yaml

Per discussion in IRC #fedora-rust, I requested a `rolling` branch for `modules/afterburn`: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/11493

afterburn-rolling-3020190507144241.2c789dff has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30 Modular. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-MODULAR-2019-ca040be1f2

afterburn-rolling-2920190507144241.b8a06959 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29 Modular. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-MODULAR-2019-76aa228c64

afterburn-rolling-2820190507144241.1e15db1a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28 Modular. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-MODULAR-2019-3935c626a5

afterburn-rolling-3020190507144241.2c789dff has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

afterburn-rolling-2920190507144241.b8a06959 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 Modular stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

afterburn-rolling-2820190507144241.1e15db1a has been pushed to the Fedora 28 Modular stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.