Bug 2304324

Summary:	[RFE:EPEL10] EPEL10 branch of tigervnc
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Pat Riehecky <riehecky>
Component:	tigervnc	Assignee:	Jan Grulich <jgrulich>
Status:	POST ---	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel10	CC:	jgrulich, mihai, orion, ossman, pasik, redhat-bugzilla, tdawson, vonsch, xavier, yselkowi
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		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:
Bug Depends On:	2325923, 2374179
Bug Blocks:	2303880

Description Pat Riehecky 2024-08-13 14:17:50 UTC

Description of problem:

Can tigervnc be branched and built for EPEL10?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Orion Poplawski 2025-08-08 16:41:29 UTC

No matching package to install: 'fltk-devel >= 1.3.3'
No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(xkbcomp)'
No matching package to install: 'xorg-x11-server-devel'
No matching package to install: 'xorg-x11-server-source'

I'm not sure this is going to fly.  But also not sure what is going to replace it.

Comment 2 Pat Riehecky 2025-08-08 17:22:56 UTC

My current workflow is weston for EPEL10.  It is a big shift, but works today.

Comment 3 Yaakov Selkowitz 2025-08-08 18:57:06 UTC

Is it just the client you're looking for, or the server?

Comment 4 Pat Riehecky 2025-08-08 19:02:28 UTC

My ideal world would have both, but the server seems like a reach since I doubt anyone wants to own the xorg packages in EPEL.

Client only would be sufficient.

Comment 5 Yaakov Selkowitz 2025-08-08 19:36:48 UTC

Client only should be possible with a one-line patch to the spec file, but fltk will need to be added to EPEL 10 first (bug 2374179).

Comment 6 Orion Poplawski 2025-08-09 00:04:39 UTC

The client would be what I would use as well.

Comment 7 Orion Poplawski 2025-08-28 13:58:03 UTC

This now builds in epel10 with %bcond server 0:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136504895

Comment 8 Pierre Ossman 2026-01-27 15:46:18 UTC

We here upstream have ported our packaging to RHEL 10 if it helps:

https://github.com/TigerVNC/tigervnc/blob/master/contrib/packages/rpm/el10/SPECS/tigervnc.spec

We're also open to collaborating around the packaging. We don't give them as much love as they need.

Comment 9 Jan Grulich 2026-01-28 12:55:29 UTC

I don't have any experience bringing a package to EPEL, yet, so maybe we can ask tdawson for some guidance?

I don't see a reason why not to bring Tigervnc to EPEL now, when it supports Wayland. I have split the package to tigervnc-x11-server and tigervnc-wayland-server so we can at least for now bring only the wayland support there.

Comment 10 Pierre Ossman 2026-01-29 09:02:59 UTC

That pull request completely removes Xvnc and x0vncserver. Can't those be kept? All the dependencies are already available in RHEL/EPEL. It's just the Xorg server source that's been removed, and that can easily be added to the TigerVNC package. Have a look at our packaging above for how it can be done.

Comment 11 Yaakov Selkowitz 2026-01-29 19:25:45 UTC

In whatever form it is handled, the xserver would still need to be *maintained*, and nobody has volunteered to do this for EPEL 10.  Therefore, the xserver components need to be excluded so that the rest can be added.