Bug 2258463

Summary: gdm should not exclude i686
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Pavel Březina <pbrezina>
Component: gdmAssignee: Ray Strode [halfline] <rstrode>
Status: CLOSED EOL QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 40CC: decathorpe, gnome-sig, mclasen, philip.wyett, rstrode, sgallagh, tdawson
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-05-16 07:51:05 UTC 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 Pavel Březina 2024-01-15 13:46:27 UTC
i686 support was excluded here: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gdm/c/940885b1fae35da1cb85cc69c61d59763223787d?branch=rawhide

However, gdm is not a leaf package since other packages depends on it. For us it is sssd depending on gdm-pam-extensions-devel.

I thought I can exclude support for i686 in sssd as well since we don't support multilib, but apparently, I should not do it since sssd is not a leaf package either.



Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Pavel Březina 2024-01-15 13:46:45 UTC
See comments in https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-287a88fffd

Comment 2 Stephen Gallagher 2024-01-15 14:28:21 UTC
(In reply to Pavel Březina from comment #0)
> i686 support was excluded here:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gdm/c/
> 940885b1fae35da1cb85cc69c61d59763223787d?branch=rawhide
> 
> However, gdm is not a leaf package since other packages depends on it. For
> us it is sssd depending on gdm-pam-extensions-devel.
> I thought I can exclude support for i686 in sssd as well since we don't
> support multilib, but apparently, I should not do it since sssd is not a
> leaf package either.
> 

Multilib is still supported in Fedora, so we absolutely need libnss_sss.so in Fedora.

> 
> 
> Reproducible: Always

Is it possible to configure SSSD so that it ONLY builds essentially sssd-client for i686? We don't really need to support building the complete package there.

Comment 3 Troy Dawson 2024-01-15 16:38:27 UTC
This is much bigger than gdm.
Investigation found that one package, that originally was a leaf package, got incorporated into a non-leaf package.
Dependency dominoes followed until it reached gdm and others.
I am re-enabling i686 on all the packages I saw and removed i686 from.  I have been told that the other packages up the dependency line are being fixed.

xdg-desktop-portal https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xdg-desktop-portal/pull-request/10
xdg-desktop-portal-gtk https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xdg-desktop-portal-gtk/pull-request/7
gnome-shell https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-shell/pull-request/23
gnome-session https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-session/pull-request/10
gdm https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gdm/pull-request/19

Comment 4 Troy Dawson 2024-01-15 23:05:47 UTC
Nevermind, evidently I missed the memo, or something.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/URKAWVPEINE4CREFO4L22MGKN6TNUGQK/
I think I'll just stop trying to be helpful and step out of the way.

Comment 5 Aoife Moloney 2024-02-15 23:10:12 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 40 development cycle.
Changing version to 40.

Comment 6 Aoife Moloney 2025-04-25 10:14:21 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora Linux 40 is nearing its end of life.
Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora Linux 40 on 2025-05-13.
It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer
maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a
'version' of '40'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora Linux version. Note that the version field may be hidden.
Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see it.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora Linux 40 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora Linux, you are encouraged to change the 'version' to a later version
prior to this bug being closed.

Comment 7 Aoife Moloney 2025-05-16 07:51:05 UTC
Fedora Linux 40 entered end-of-life (EOL) status on 2025-05-13.

Fedora Linux 40 is no longer maintained, which means that it
will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we
are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora Linux
please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Note that the version
field may be hidden. Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see
the version field.

If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against an
active release.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.