Description of problem: As asked here https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/ISKUUEZWLXWQYAKXR4ZPCN3EGX3KYUIQ/ COPR builds packages based on CentOS Linux 8. What happens at EOL of CentOS Linux 8? In the above mentioned "discussion" the possibility to use rhelchroots was depicted. Any plans to switch to RHEL build targets?
This is in progress, but there's no ETA, yet.
Would CentOS Stream 8 be an acceptable solution here?
Not really, we want to be as close as possible to Koji (and koji builds against RHEL).
My understanding is that AlmaLinux intends to offer all the architectures of RHEL relatively soon, so it could work as a replacement for the base OS for EPEL chroots in COPR.
One detail I forgot about: do Koji EPEL 8 builds use packages on top of the `baseos + appstream + codeready-builder` RHEL repos?
Another thing is that we can not do emulated builds for RHEL chroots in mock (with subscription-manager, the entitlements are arch-specific and can not be used cross-arch).
(In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #5) > One detail I forgot about: do Koji EPEL 8 builds use packages on top of > the `baseos + appstream + codeready-builder` RHEL repos? Yes, they do.
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4) > My understanding is that AlmaLinux intends to offer all the architectures of > RHEL relatively soon, so it could work as a replacement for the base OS for > EPEL chroots in COPR. Just to follow up ans confirm Neal's statement. Yes we should have all architectures available relatively soon.
I've got a PR prepared to switch to AlmaLinux now, which is in draft state while I wait to hear back on the ppc64le build of AlmaLinux: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/pull/803
I think there are only 2 reasonable defaults: Rocky Linux or AlmaLinux (just pick whatever of those works better in practice, it should not really matter). Anything that requires a subscription of any sort, even a free-as-in-beer one, should be a non-starter. The default EPEL config needs to just work and to be free of field-of-use restrictions, including technically enforced policy restrictions breaking use cases such as emulation. So requiring a RHEL developer subscription is not an acceptable solution. The discrepancy with the EPEL Koji and/or Copr configuration can easily be fixed by changing those, too.
- Mock will follow the decision given by Fedora EPEL Steering Committee: https://pagure.io/epel/issue/133 - Fedora Copr is going to be updated to use RHEL base for building EPEL packages (up to 220 subscriptions)