Bug 2417289 - Include debuginfod url in epel-release?
Summary: Include debuginfod url in epel-release?
Keywords:
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: Fedora EPEL
Classification: Fedora
Component: epel-release
Version: epel10
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kevin Fenzi
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-11-26 16:13 UTC by Pat Riehecky
Modified: 2026-01-03 20:55 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Pat Riehecky 2025-11-26 16:13:12 UTC
Description of problem:

Since debuginfod is up and working, would it make sense for epel-release to drop some sort of `fedora-epel.urls` or something in /etc/debuginfod/ so these artifacts can be fetched automatically?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):epel-10


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Pat Riehecky 2025-11-26 21:36:07 UTC
Probably also need to drop the IMA key in /etc/keys/ima in DER format too....

Comment 2 Kevin Fenzi 2026-01-03 20:33:38 UTC
Adding fche here for comment on the debuginfod idea.

On the IMA thing... I am not sure how useful it would be. We do not have the epel key trusted/setup in the RHEL kernel, and I doubt that that would be something they would want to do. I suppose it could be helpful for debuginfod verification...

Comment 3 Frank Ch. Eigler 2026-01-03 20:52:17 UTC
The fedora debuginfod servers could certainly start indexing epel rpms (adjusting the -I regexp to include the .el* file name glob, not just .fc*), and if so, absolutely, including their URL in a new .url file in centos-release would make sense.  Ditto re.  /etc/keys/ima: the debuginfod clients can verify file integrity apart from any kernel-side enforcement support presence.

Comment 4 Frank Ch. Eigler 2026-01-03 20:55:13 UTC
We're using ~33% of VM storage at the moment.  Does someone have a ready estimate of how much EPEL RPM content exists (let's say .el9 upward?), in comparison to Fedora (we index .fc35 onward)?


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