Bug 1585212 - Compat v8-6291/v8-6291-devel package?
Summary: Compat v8-6291/v8-6291-devel package?
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED EOL
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: v8
Version: 28
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Tom "spot" Callaway
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1584453
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-06-01 14:12 UTC by Pavel Raiskup
Modified: 2019-05-28 20:36 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of: 1584453
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-05-28 20:36:24 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-01 14:12:36 UTC
The v8 was updated from 6.2.91 -> 6.7.17;  and the package plv8 stopped
working, what's worse I'm not able to re-build the package -- neither
upstream is yet compatible with that new version.

It would be nice to have another compat version of v8, or if any helped
me/upstream to port plv8 against the newer v8.

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1584453 +++

Description of problem:
ERROR:  could not load library "/usr/lib64/pgsql/plv8.so": /usr/lib64/pgsql/plv8.so: undefined symbol: _ZN2v811ArrayBuffer9Allocator7ReserveEm
(XX000)
QPSQL: Unable to create query

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
plv8-2.1.0-6.fc28.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run xTuple updater for postbook-upgrade-4.11.3
2.
3.

Actual results:
Error as in description

Expected results:
Upgrade should work.

Additional info:

--- Additional comment from Pavel Raiskup on 2018-06-01 13:42:20 CEST ---

Thanks for the report, seems like there are new releases of plv8, let me
check whether update would help.

--- Additional comment from Pavel Raiskup on 2018-06-01 16:07:32 CEST ---

Ok, seems like we won't be able to build plv8 anymore -- the new updated
v8/v8-devel is incompatible with plv8 package.  I'll need a help, here is
the upstream report:
https://github.com/plv8/plv8/issues/281

Comment 1 Tom "spot" Callaway 2018-06-01 15:02:56 UTC
Hm. If someone _else_ wants to maintain another revision of v8, more power to them, but I am already maintaining "v8" and "v8-314", so I'm not volunteering.

Comment 2 Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-01 16:05:31 UTC
Acceptable, me neither.  I could go with bundled v8, but it's neither
something I'm OK with.  If nobody else needs that, I'd probably
orphan/retire plv8 in Fedora, it's too soon for that.

Comment 3 Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-01 16:07:56 UTC
Only unfortunate thing is that the incompatible update happened in the
middle of F28, through updates repo.  It means that we've built plv8,
shipped it, it's install-able, but it fails to load because of the ABI
changed.

Comment 4 Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-01 16:27:22 UTC
Seems like plv8 is the only package depending on v8 :-) in Fedora;  ugly
idea, what about to downgrade to something compatible with `6.4.388.44` :)
(per discussion in https://github.com/plv8/plv8/issues/281)

Comment 5 Tom "spot" Callaway 2018-06-01 20:16:42 UTC
Honestly, given the incredible amount of pain that v8 is to keep alive, I am extremely tempted to retire it altogether. Chromium isn't even able to use the system copy, because it moves too fast.

My advice to you would be to use a bundled copy of v8 if the plv8 upstream is not able to keep up.

Comment 6 Jerry Sievert 2018-06-01 20:33:26 UTC
plv8 maintainer here - you should not be attempting to have packages depend on a shared v8 at this point, as per the v8 developers.

even if you are able to maintain shared packages, a v8 compiled to be embedded in one project likely will not work with another, due to the configurations required - for instance, plv8 will work with a library compiled for external snapshots, but not with one compiled with external startup data.

and as noted above by Pavel, the ABI changes, as does the API, on what we would consider "minor" updates.  it's not a matter of plv8 "keeping up", the 2.3 series of releases is pegged to the same v8 versions that node LTS version is pegged to.  this is by design, since the v8 API changes significantly between sometimes daily releases.

your best bet is to do the same thing you are doing with node, bundle v8 - this is the default configuration for plv8 as well.

Comment 7 John Griffiths 2018-06-01 21:10:46 UTC
Well abandoning plv8 and v8 has a trickle down to postbooks and any other package that may use v8 or plv8.

I know Fedora is a development Linux. I've been using and testing since Fedora Core 4. 

I try to use it for real life including postbooks and much more. I had to start running the postbooks client on a Windows box since it would no longer run on Fedora 26. I was able to keep the postgres database and the postbooks db on Fedora 26. With the upgrade to Fedora 28, I can no longer do that.

Fedora is what it is; a place of development and ever moving packages for better or worse. I have always tended to want the latest and greatest, but now, I need stability, too. As I have gotten older academia has given way to real life. Business is business. I don't want this to come  off as sour grapes, but I guess I must reluctantly move to a Linux platform that is more stable like Ubuntu. I find that somewhat disconcerting as I don't know what I will lose.

Pardon my lamentations. I feel I am about to lose an old friend.

Comment 8 Jerry Sievert 2018-06-01 21:13:03 UTC
as an aside, plv8 does build and run easily on windows these days.  what a backward world we've become.

Comment 9 Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-01 21:27:19 UTC
John, would you offer a help with maintaining plv8 in Fedora, if we did the
bundle?  I'd be more then happy to handover the package to you.

Comment 10 John Griffiths 2018-06-01 21:59:16 UTC
Pavel, I wish I had the time. Like I said life has moved me to a era that I must focus on business and not making a computer platform work so I can use it in business.

I really appreciate all the volunteers and the any hours that people put in to making Fedora what it is.

Comment 11 John Griffiths 2018-06-02 04:21:54 UTC
I did solve my issue of being able to update postbooks by uninstalling the Fedora 28 v8 and plv8 packages and installing the plv8 package from xTuple. It is using a bundled v8 version. Solves my immediate issue, but does not solve issue of v8/plv8 to maintain or to retire in Fedora.

It may be better if the packages that use plv8 assume responsibility for their on flavor of plv8/v8. Since I am using it with postbooks database on postgres, postbooks (which is a version too old for the postgresql on Fedora 28) should maintain the plv8/v8 required for postbooks. That way the needed version of plv8 would be a package related to the using package. something like postbooks-plv8.

Comment 12 Pavel Raiskup 2018-06-11 14:24:08 UTC
(In reply to John Griffiths from comment #11)
> I did solve my issue of being able to update postbooks by uninstalling the
> Fedora 28 v8 and plv8 packages and installing the plv8 package from xTuple.
> It is using a bundled v8 version. Solves my immediate issue, but does not
> solve issue of v8/plv8 to maintain or to retire in Fedora.

Glad to hear that there's way out, I'd say that there might be other people
having the same issues - so more detailed howto is welcome.

> It may be better if the packages that use plv8 assume responsibility for
> their on flavor of plv8/v8.

There are no such packages in Fedora, if I'm not wrong.

> Since I am using it with postbooks database on
> postgres, postbooks (which is a version too old for the postgresql on Fedora
> 28) should maintain the plv8/v8 required for postbooks. That way the needed
> version of plv8 would be a package related to the using package. something
> like postbooks-plv8.

It is problem hand-over to different maintainers, though.  If there's
volunteer for postbooks-plv8 maintenance, it would be better to take
the maintainership of plv8 directly (because that person would be OK
to bundle the whole v8 environment).

(In reply to Jerry Sievert from comment #8)
> as an aside, plv8 does build and run easily on windows these days.  what a
> backward world we've become.

But on Linux we can not do bad things acceptable on Windows.  E.g. the
actual plv8 build script goes and 'git clones' something (from somewhere,
which is not only slow, but insecure).  Jerry, would you be OK to take
the responsibility and bundle the v8 environment into plv8 tarball?

Comment 13 Ben Cotton 2019-05-02 19:17:08 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 28 is nearing its end of life.
On 2019-May-28 Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for
Fedora 28. 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 Fedora 'version' of '28'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 28 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, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 14 Ben Cotton 2019-05-02 21:36:18 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 28 is nearing its end of life.
On 2019-May-28 Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for
Fedora 28. 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 Fedora 'version' of '28'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 28 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, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 15 Ben Cotton 2019-05-28 20:36:24 UTC
Fedora 28 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2019-05-28. Fedora 28 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 please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

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


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.