Bug 2216149

Summary:	Please branch and build fd-find in epel8
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Dora O’Fee <webmaster>
Component:	rust-fd-find	Assignee:	Michel Alexandre Salim <michel>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel8	CC:	decathorpe, michel, rust-sig
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	rust-fd-find-8.7.0-3.el8	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-06-28 00:47:19 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Dora O’Fee 2023-06-20 10:10:59 UTC

Please branch and build fd-find in epel8. RHEL8 is supported through 2029, so this package is helpful to many of us on enterprise linux.

If you do not wish to maintain fd-find in epel8,
or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner,
the EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package;
please add the epel-packagers-sig group through
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/<package>/addgroup
and grant it commit access, or collaborator access on epel* branches.

Comment 1 Fabio Valentini 2023-06-22 15:27:07 UTC

Sadly building Rust packages is much more onerous on EPEL8 than it is for EPEL9.
On EPEL9, all the tools that are available on Fedora are available.
On EPEL8, none of these tools are available, and we need to fall back to the "bare minimum support" tools that are provided by RHEL 8 - so it's basically an entirely different package on EPEL 8 than everywhere else.
I don't maintain EPEL 8 branches of any Rust packages, these are handled (if they exist at all) by salimma (now added as CC).

Comment 2 Dora O’Fee 2023-06-24 11:59:07 UTC

Oh yes, it’s much easier to just package the upstream binary release, which is what we do in copr but probably goes against EPEL policy.

salimma, I saw you did the EPEL 8 branch of ripgrep. Would you be able to do it again for fd?

One caveat to note is that unlike ripgrep, not being able to use jemalloc with fd does cause a performance hit [1] – which seems to beg the question whether it might not be preferable to just go with the binary release.

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216193#c0

Comment 3 Michel Alexandre Salim 2023-06-26 17:46:03 UTC

Yeah, I can do this. Basically my EPEL 8 builds are done by using 'cargo vendor' so it should work as expected. Let me know if the test update works after it's linked here!

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2023-06-26 19:33:10 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2023-207cba2611 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-207cba2611

Comment 5 Dora O’Fee 2023-06-27 02:09:08 UTC

Works great! Many thanks for taking the time to do it.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2023-06-27 11:01:32 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2023-207cba2611 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-207cba2611

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2023-06-28 00:47:19 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2023-207cba2611 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.