Bug 2212039

Summary: please branch and build zig in epel9
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: JL <registered>
Component: zigAssignee: Jan Drögehoff <sentrycraft123>
Status: NEW --- QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 38CC: neil, petersen, sentrycraft123
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description JL 2023-06-03 09:57:53 UTC
Having zig available on Rocky 9.x would be a great convenience

Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Jens Petersen 2023-07-02 15:59:38 UTC
+1 for EPEL 9

I can try to help if you want:
may need to work out which commit can build.

Comment 2 Jan Drögehoff 2023-07-02 16:46:03 UTC
In the future this would be great and help with it would be appreciated as I don't have a lot of experience with EPEL, but as is it stands the Zig package is in a rough state because LLVM, Zig and Fedora don't tend to line up.
Those troubles are being documented at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2139038

I appreciate the commit to the repo Jens, but could you refrain from doing stray pushes like that?
This one is rather simple but anything bigger could cause serious conflicts on anyone working on something.
Pushing work-in-progress changes isn't always an option since Fedora puts restrictions on branches.

Comment 3 Jens Petersen 2023-07-03 04:45:51 UTC
Sorry about that (I should have looked for activity in bz).

In future will open a PR instead, my bad.

(BTW %fedora isn't defined in rhel/epel, though in fairness the current package only targets Fedora,
so one should use clucky things like 0%{?fedora} or %{defined fedora} instead)