No edit summary |
(Deferred to F38 by FESCo) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
= Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib <!-- The name of your change proposal --> = | = Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib <!-- The name of your change proposal --> = | ||
== Summary == | == Summary == | ||
| Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. Still I'm not sure if this testing can ever be enough, considering all the use-cases we do not know. | We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. Still I'm not sure if this testing can ever be enough, considering all the use-cases we do not know. | ||
== non goal == | |||
It is not goal to embed any security libraries. JDK is using several security providers, and all are currently loaded dynamically in runtime. Still there is remaining issue with cacerts: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#cacerts | |||
== Owner == | == Owner == | ||
| Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
== Current status == | == Current status == | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:ChangeAcceptedF38]] | ||
<!-- When your change proposal page is completed and ready for review and announcement --> | <!-- When your change proposal page is completed and ready for review and announcement --> | ||
<!-- remove Category:ChangePageIncomplete and change it to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler --> | <!-- remove Category:ChangePageIncomplete and change it to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler --> | ||
| Line 36: | Line 38: | ||
[[Category:SystemWideChange]] | [[Category:SystemWideChange]] | ||
* System or Self contained change? By the changes done, this is '''Self Contianed Change'''. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more ''System Wide Change''. | * System or Self contained change? By the changes done, this is '''Self Contianed Change'''. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more ''System Wide Change''. | ||
* Targeted release: [[Releases/ | * Targeted release: [[Releases/38 | Fedora Linux 38 ]] | ||
* Last updated: <!-- this is an automatic macro — you don't need to change this line --> {{REVISIONYEAR}}-{{REVISIONMONTH}}-{{REVISIONDAY2}} | * Last updated: <!-- this is an automatic macro — you don't need to change this line --> {{REVISIONYEAR}}-{{REVISIONMONTH}}-{{REVISIONDAY2}} | ||
<!-- After the change proposal is accepted by FESCo, tracking bug is created in Bugzilla and linked to this page | <!-- After the change proposal is accepted by FESCo, tracking bug is created in Bugzilla and linked to this page | ||
| Line 45: | Line 47: | ||
--> | --> | ||
* [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/ devel thread] | * [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/ devel thread] | ||
* FESCo issue: | * FESCo issue: [https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2794 #2794] | ||
* Tracker bug: | * Tracker bug: [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2097516 #2097516] | ||
* Release notes tracker: | * Release notes tracker: [https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/release-notes/issue/848 #848] | ||
== Detailed Description == | == Detailed Description == | ||
| Line 54: | Line 56: | ||
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details in the main page then here. | Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details in the main page then here. | ||
See very valuable thread about the topic: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/ | |||
== Feedback == | == Feedback == | ||
| Line 97: | Line 101: | ||
== Scope == | == Scope == | ||
* Proposal owners: push improved version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-latest-openjdk/pull-request/98#request_diff to all JDKs - one | * Proposal owners: push improved version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-latest-openjdk/pull-request/98#request_diff to all JDKs - one freby one from latest, over 17 to 11 and 8. Once settled down in F37 the backport to F36 is expected. | ||
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> | <!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> | ||
| Line 103: | Line 107: | ||
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> | <!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> | ||
* Release engineering: | * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10798 #10798] <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
<!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)? Is a mass rebuild required? include a link to the releng issue. | <!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)? Is a mass rebuild required? include a link to the releng issue. | ||
The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication --> | The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication --> | ||
| Line 168: | Line 172: | ||
* Contingency mechanism: Revert the patches and rework https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs | * Contingency mechanism: Revert the patches and rework https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs | ||
<!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place? This will typically be the beta freeze. --> | <!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place? This will typically be the beta freeze. --> | ||
* Contingency deadline: before f37 | * Contingency deadline: before f37 Beta freeze | ||
<!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? --> | <!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? --> | ||
* Blocks release? Unless the java-stack will become completely borked then no. | * Blocks release? Unless the java-stack will become completely borked then no. | ||
== Documentation == | == Documentation == | ||
Latest revision as of 16:40, 7 September 2022
Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib
Summary
This is initial step to move JDKs to be more like other JDKs, to build proper transferable images, and to lower certification burden of each binary. Long storyshort, first step in: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs
This first step will move, one by one, individual JDKs in F37 to be built --with-stdc++lib=static and against in-tree (bundeld) libraries: --with-zlib="bundled" --with-freetype="bundled" --with-libjpeg="bundled" --with-giflib="bundled" --withlibpng="bundled" --with-lcms="bundled" --with-harfbuzz="bundled"
We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. Still I'm not sure if this testing can ever be enough, considering all the use-cases we do not know.
non goal
It is not goal to embed any security libraries. JDK is using several security providers, and all are currently loaded dynamically in runtime. Still there is remaining issue with cacerts: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#cacerts
Owner
- Name: Jiri Vanek
- Email: jvanek@redhat.com
Current status
- System or Self contained change? By the changes done, this is Self Contianed Change. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more System Wide Change.
- Targeted release: Fedora Linux 38
- Last updated: 2022-09-07
- devel thread
- FESCo issue: #2794
- Tracker bug: #2097516
- Release notes tracker: #848
Detailed Description
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs for whole picture
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details in the main page then here.
See very valuable thread about the topic: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/
Feedback
According to short investigations, there are already precedents, where certification is a reason to build once, certificate, and repack.
According to developers, the non-portbale JDK is causing upredicted behavior different from other JDK vendors
According to JDK packagers and testers, there is to much JDKs now, and the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_Fedora_JDKs_to_become_single-built.2C_portable.2C_ordinary_JDKs.2C_while_keeping_comfortable.2C_usual_system_integration is the only way out
Benefit to Fedora
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Motivation for whole picture.
This particualr proposal's main benefit will be that Fedora's JDKs as packed in RPMs will again start to resemble upstream JDKs and other vendors build, and some platfrom specific issues disappear, while JDKs remain same in view of system integration and user expereince
Scope
- Proposal owners: push improved version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-latest-openjdk/pull-request/98#request_diff to all JDKs - one freby one from latest, over 17 to 11 and 8. Once settled down in F37 the backport to F36 is expected.
- Other developers: really, nothing. If there will be unexpected impact to other developers, the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs may need rework
- Release engineering: #10798
- Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
- Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
- Alignment with Objectives:
Upgrade/compatibility impact
The compatibility and upgrade path should remain completely smooth.
How To Test
Install system JDK (java-17-openjdk) and ru your favorite application or development. No regression should be noted.
User Experience
Because of in-tree libraries, minimal image or font rendering differences canbe spotted after very detailed investigations - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Side_effects - still, no of th e https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Known_issues should be hit by this proposal.
Dependencies
No dependent packages should notice the change.
Contingency Plan
- Contingency mechanism: Revert the patches and rework https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs
- Contingency deadline: before f37 Beta freeze
- Blocks release? Unless the java-stack will become completely borked then no.
Documentation
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs