Bug 1760698 - Luarocks for el8
Summary: Luarocks for el8
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora EPEL
Classification: Fedora
Component: luarocks
Version: epel8
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michel Lind
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-10-11 06:46 UTC by Ulrik Haugen
Modified: 2021-02-14 01:16 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version: luarocks-3.5.0-1.el8
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-02-14 01:16:58 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ulrik Haugen 2019-10-11 06:46:14 UTC
Please add luarocks to EPEL for el8.

I just rebuilt luarocks-2.4.3-2.fc28.src.rpm in the Docker image centos:8 and it seems to work without modification.

(And before i realised that that version might be more appropriate i tried luarocks-2.3.0-1.el7.src.rpm with the same results.)

Comment 2 Yuval Lifshitz 2020-11-12 06:47:20 UTC
as part of the ceph project, runtime dependency is added to luarocks [1].
in order for that feature to be supported on centos8/rehl8 we are adding this package to one of the ceph specific repos, but it would be better if this could be in epel8.

[1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/37924

Comment 3 Ken Dreyer (Red Hat) 2020-12-21 18:24:58 UTC
Michel, would you please give "ktdreyer" and "kkeithle" admin access in dist-git so we can add this package to epel8?

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/luarocks/adduser

Kaleb, when you uploaded a package for Ceph somewhere, did you modify the fedora rawhide package at all, so that we should make the same modifications in epel8?

Comment 4 Ken Dreyer (Red Hat) 2020-12-21 18:30:24 UTC
Kaleb I see we have http://apt-mirror.front.sepia.ceph.com/lab-extras/8/luarocks-3.3.1-3.el8.x86_64.rpm now. I am wondering where I can find the source for that.

Comment 5 Kaleb KEITHLEY 2020-12-21 19:53:32 UTC
The source 

  (from Source0: in the fedora dist-git luarocks.spec file at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/luarocks/blob/master/f/luarocks.spec and/or the CentOS dist-git luarocks.spec file at https://git.centos.org/rpms/luarocks/blob/c8-sig-storage-ceph-octopus/f/SPECS/luarocks.spec)

is http://luarocks.org/releases/luarocks-%{version}.tar.gz

I do not build luarocks in any version of Fedora or EPEL. RPMs are not — and can not be — built in EPEL because the package exists in RHEL. (packageID=59432 in brew)

I did build the luarocks rpm in and for the CentOS Storage SIG, and Yuval added it to Sepia.

Comment 6 Ken Dreyer (Red Hat) 2020-12-21 22:13:05 UTC
Thanks!

luarocks is not in RHEL 8. We can ship it in EPEL 8.

Here's the change I've made to make the rawhide luarocks.spec build for el8: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/luarocks/pull-request/1

Comment 7 Kaleb KEITHLEY 2020-12-22 00:48:35 UTC
I don't know, but I see el8 builds in brew. Coupled with it not ever having been built in EPEL for EL-8 tend to make me believe that if it could be shipped in EPEL-8 then it would be already.

The last EPEL build, for EL-7, was in 2016, followed not long after by the first build in brew for RHEL-7.

It may not be in the RHEL8 BaseOS, but it is somewhere in RHEL-8. (Just as GlusterFS and Ceph aren't in RHEL, but they are components of products on RHEL, so they are not built in EPEL.)

I suggest you check with the Fedora and EPEL package owner, salimma (IRC: michel_slm), to see why he isn't building it for EPEL-8. And in any event, he — as the luarocks package owner — is the person that would do builds of it for EPEL if it's allowed.

Comment 8 Ken Dreyer (Red Hat) 2021-01-19 23:09:32 UTC
There is no EPEL policy preventing us from shipping it in EPEL, and since Ceph uses EPEL, let's put it into EPEL.

Comment 9 Michel Lind 2021-01-28 04:49:59 UTC
Hi! Sorry for the late reply. Was looking at refactoring luarocks so it can be a proper noarch package.

$ fedpkg request-branch epel8
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31917

I can add "ktdreyer" and "kkeithle" if you're both interested in comaintaining this.

Comment 10 Kaleb KEITHLEY 2021-01-28 12:33:30 UTC
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #9)
> Hi! Sorry for the late reply. Was looking at refactoring luarocks so it can
> be a proper noarch package.
> 
> $ fedpkg request-branch epel8
> https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31917
> 
> I can add "ktdreyer" and "kkeithle" if you're both interested in
> comaintaining this.

I am not interested in being a comaintainer, please don't add me.

Comment 11 Michel Lind 2021-01-29 04:43:36 UTC
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #9)
> Hi! Sorry for the late reply. Was looking at refactoring luarocks so it can
> be a proper noarch package.
> 
> $ fedpkg request-branch epel8
> https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31917
> 
Brainfading and totally forgot I branched this moons ago. Building now.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2021-01-29 04:52:39 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-6138a9065f has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-6138a9065f

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2021-01-30 02:16:35 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-6138a9065f 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-2021-6138a9065f

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

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2021-02-14 01:16:58 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-6138a9065f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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