This is not an upgrade or replacement of the existing 6.0 or dotnet7.0 packages, but an entirely new package. The packages can all be installed side-by-side.

Here's a diff of the dotnet7.0 and this new dotnet8.0 spec file: https://gist.github.com/omajid/c8124bd9d1b25696803253b0516c5098

This package needs to be bootstrapped. Which can be done by changing the %bcond_without. We have a blanket bootstrap exception from the fedora packaging committee: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/989.

Taking this review.

Initial spec review:

> Release:        0.1%{?dist}

This should be "0%{?dist}.1"

> %if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 8
> ExclusiveArch:  aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64
> %else
> ExclusiveArch:  x86_64
> %endif

Can we flip this like so?

%if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} < 8
ExclusiveArch: x86_64
%else
ExclusiveArch:  aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64
%endif

Or if RHEL 7 doesn't matter anymore, can we just simplify to:

ExclusiveArch: aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64

> %if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} > 7
> BuildRequires:  glibc-langpack-en
> %endif

Another question about RHEL 7 here. If we don't care anymore, can we drop the conditionals?

> %if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 9
> # Setting this macro ensures that only clang supported options will be
> # added to ldflags and cflags.
> %global toolchain clang
> %set_build_flags
> %else
> # Filter flags not supported by clang
> %global dotnet_cflags %(echo %optflags | sed -re 's/-specs=[^ ]*//g')
> %global dotnet_ldflags %(echo %{__global_ldflags} | sed -re 's/-specs=[^ ]*//g')
> export CFLAGS="%{dotnet_cflags}"
> export CXXFLAGS="%{dotnet_cflags}"
> export LDFLAGS="%{dotnet_ldflags}"
> %endif

Can you please flip this conditional too?

> %if 0%{?fedora} > 35
> # lttng in Fedora > 35 is incompatible with .NET
> export COMPlus_LTTng=0
> %endif

Doesn't this also affect RHEL 9+ (or at least RHEL 10+)?

Thanks for taking up the review!


(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #3)
> Initial spec review:
> 
> > Release:        0.1%{?dist}
> 
> This should be "0%{?dist}.1"

Done, but I am not sure I understand the change. I looked at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Versioning_Examples and that still seems to suggest putting 0.1 before %{?dist}.

> ExclusiveArch: aarch64 ppc64le s390x x86_64
> 
...
> 
> Another question about RHEL 7 here. If we don't care anymore, can we drop
> the conditionals?

Done.

> > %if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 9
> > # Setting this macro ensures that only clang supported options will be
> > # added to ldflags and cflags.
> > %global toolchain clang
> > %set_build_flags
> > %else
> > # Filter flags not supported by clang
> > %global dotnet_cflags %(echo %optflags | sed -re 's/-specs=[^ ]*//g')
> > %global dotnet_ldflags %(echo %{__global_ldflags} | sed -re 's/-specs=[^ ]*//g')
> > export CFLAGS="%{dotnet_cflags}"
> > export CXXFLAGS="%{dotnet_cflags}"
> > export LDFLAGS="%{dotnet_ldflags}"
> > %endif
> 
> Can you please flip this conditional too?

I would be happy to. Can you help me understand why, though? The previous conditional suggestions were about putting the future/happy path first, and dealing with legacy/fall-back in the "else" clause. This is already set up that way. In the future, we can simplify to just the  the "then" clause:

    # Setting this macro ensures that only clang supported options will be
    # added to ldflags and cflags.
    %global toolchain clang
    %set_build_flags

> > %if 0%{?fedora} > 35
> > # lttng in Fedora > 35 is incompatible with .NET
> > export COMPlus_LTTng=0
> > %endif
> 
> Doesn't this also affect RHEL 9+ (or at least RHEL 10+)?

It doesn't affect RHEL 9 (which has lttng-ust 2.12, just like Fedora 35). I don't know what happens in a RHEL 10 context, which might inherit lttng-ust 2.13.x from Fedora.

Hey Neal, what are the next steps here? Any thoughts on my previous comments?

Just chiming in to note that there's a small amount of pressure building from the community (myself included) to see this resolved: https://github.com/dotnet/docs/issues/38366

(In reply to Omair Majid from comment #5)
> Hey Neal, what are the next steps here? Any thoughts on my previous comments?

Okay, I agree with your comments here. But, I can also say that we can pretty much be guaranteed that RHEL 10 is going to inherit Fedora's lttng-ust.

Spec URL: https://pagure.io/dotnet-sig/dotnet8.0/raw/main/f/dotnet8.0.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@dotnet-sig/dotnet-preview/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06729827-dotnet8.0/dotnet8.0-8.0.100~rc.1-0.fc40~bootstrap.1.src.rpm

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6731562
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244633-dotnet8.0/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06731562-dotnet8.0/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0 : /usr/lib64/dotnet/packs/Microsoft.NETCore.App.Host.fedora.40-x64/8.0.0-rc.1.23419.4/runtimes/fedora.40-x64/native/coreclr_delegates.h dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0 : /usr/lib64/dotnet/packs/Microsoft.NETCore.App.Host.fedora.40-x64/8.0.0-rc.1.23419.4/runtimes/fedora.40-x64/native/hostfxr.h dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0 : /usr/lib64/dotnet/packs/Microsoft.NETCore.App.Host.fedora.40-x64/8.0.0-rc.1.23419.4/runtimes/fedora.40-x64/native/nethost.h 
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Not a valid SPDX expression '0BSD AND Apache-2.0 AND (Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception) AND APSL-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND BSD-4-Clause AND BSL-1.0 AND bzip2-1.0.6 AND CC0-1.0 AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND CC-PDDC AND CNRI-Python AND EPL-1.0 AND GPL-2.0-only AND (GPL-2.0-only WITH GCC-exception-2.0) AND GPL-2.0-or-later AND GPL-3.0-only AND ICU AND ISC AND LGPL-2.1-only AND LGPL-2.1-or-later AND LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain AND LicenseRef-ISO-8879 AND MIT AND MIT-Wu AND MS-PL AND MS-RL AND NCSA AND OFL-1.1 AND OpenSSL AND Unicode-DFS-2015 AND Unicode-DFS-2016 AND W3C-19980720 AND X11 AND Zlib'.
  Read more: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1
- Package has .a files: dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0. Illegal package name: dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0. Does not provide -static: dotnet-apphost-pack-8.0.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries

Please know that there can be false-positives.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Review notes:

* Package follows Fedora Packaging Guidelines
* Package builds and installs
* Package licensing is correctly handled
* No serious issues from rpmlint

At this point, this is pretty good (all things considered), so...

PACKAGE APPROVED.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dotnet8.0

Thanks for the review, Neal!

I have built .NET 8 for all current versions of Fedora:

Rawhide: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-0b799a957f
Fedora 39: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ada4de53b1
Fedora 38: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-eefadf07e8