From Fedora Project Wiki
< Changes
(→Owner) |
|||
| (66 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!-- The actual name of your proposed change page should look something like: Changes/Your_Change_Proposal_Name. This keeps all change proposals in the same namespace --> | <!-- The actual name of your proposed change page should look something like: Changes/Your_Change_Proposal_Name. This keeps all change proposals in the same namespace --> | ||
= RPM Macros for Build Flags <!-- The name of your change proposal --> = | = RPM Macros for Build Flags <!-- The name of your change proposal --> = | ||
== Summary == | == Summary == | ||
<!-- A sentence or two summarizing what this change is and what it will do. This information is used for the overall changeset summary page for each release. Note that motivation for the change should be in the Benefit to Fedora section below, and this part should answer the question "What?" rather than "Why?". --> | <!-- A sentence or two summarizing what this change is and what it will do. This information is used for the overall changeset summary page for each release. Note that motivation for the change should be in the Benefit to Fedora section below, and this part should answer the question "What?" rather than "Why?". --> | ||
Create | Create "extra flag" macros to make it easier for packages to add to the default list of compiler flags. | ||
== Owner == | == Owner == | ||
| Line 27: | Line 20: | ||
== 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 34: | Line 27: | ||
<!-- Select proper category, default is Self Contained Change --> | <!-- Select proper category, default is Self Contained Change --> | ||
[[Category:SelfContainedChange]] | <!--[[Category:SelfContainedChange]]--> | ||
[[Category:SystemWideChange]] | |||
* 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 38: | ||
ON_QA -> change is fully code complete | ON_QA -> change is fully code complete | ||
--> | --> | ||
* FESCo issue: | * [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SNV72TC5SDPUSQEVULKRKPIJE2ZMQUIP/ devel thread] | ||
* Tracker bug: | * FESCo issue: [https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2805 #2805] | ||
* Release notes tracker: <will | * Tracker bug: [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2100610 #2100610] | ||
* Release notes tracker: <will not assigned by the Wrangler -- not user-facing> | |||
== Detailed Description == | == Detailed Description == | ||
<!-- Expand on the summary, if appropriate. A couple sentences suffices to explain the goal, but the more details you can provide the better. --> | <!-- Expand on the summary, if appropriate. A couple sentences suffices to explain the goal, but the more details you can provide the better. --> | ||
The macros file in the redhat-rpm-config package contains a list of default compiler flags for packages to use when compiling C, C++, and Fortran packages. This change will add new macros to redhat-rpm-config which will make it easier for packages to add their own compiler flags. | |||
The proposed macros for adding new flags are: | |||
%_pkg_extra_cflags | |||
%_pkg_extra_cxxflags | |||
%_pkg_extra_fflags | |||
%_pkg_extra_ldflags | |||
These will be added to %{build_cflags}, %{build_cxxflags}, %{build_fflags}, and %{build_ldflags} respectively to allow packages to add their own flags to the default list: e.g. | |||
%build_cflags %{optflags} %{_pkg_extra_cflags} | |||
== Feedback == | == Feedback == | ||
<!-- Summarize the feedback from the community and address why you chose not to accept proposed alternatives. This section is optional for all change proposals but is strongly suggested. Incorporating feedback here as it is raised gives FESCo a clearer view of your proposal and leaves a good record for the future. If you get no feedback, that is useful to note in this section as well. For innovative or possibly controversial ideas, consider collecting feedback before you file the change proposal. --> | <!-- Summarize the feedback from the community and address why you chose not to accept proposed alternatives. This section is optional for all change proposals but is strongly suggested. Incorporating feedback here as it is raised gives FESCo a clearer view of your proposal and leaves a good record for the future. If you get no feedback, that is useful to note in this section as well. For innovative or possibly controversial ideas, consider collecting feedback before you file the change proposal. --> | ||
The original proposal would have replaced every existing compiler flag in redhat-rpm-config with it's own macro. However, it was determined that this may be a little bit too confusing since there would be ambiguity about whether, for example, %global _flag_f_exceptions %{nil} would actually disable exceptions by adding -fno-exceptions to the flags or if it would just remove the -fexceptions flag. Rather than hold up other useful and fairly straight-forward changes in this proposal, the proposal owners decided to drop the flag macros from this proposal. It could be revisited in a later release. | |||
== Benefit to Fedora == | == Benefit to Fedora == | ||
* It will provide a standard way to add to the list of default compiler flags. | |||
* It will make it easier to determine which packages add compiler flags by doing a simple grep of the spec files. | |||
* It will make it easier for toolchain developers to experiment with adding new flags to the distribution as this can be done with a simple macro definition instead of patching redhat-rpm-config. | |||
<!-- What is the benefit to the distribution? Will the software we generate be improved? How will the process of creating Fedora releases be improved? | <!-- What is the benefit to the distribution? Will the software we generate be improved? How will the process of creating Fedora releases be improved? | ||
| Line 85: | Line 97: | ||
== Scope == | == Scope == | ||
* Proposal owners: | * Proposal owners: | ||
** Proposal owners will update the redhat-rpm-config package and add the new macros. | |||
** Proposal owners will test the changes to ensure that the correct flags are still being used. | |||
<!-- 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?--> | ||
* Other developers: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | * Other developers: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
** Other developers may, but are not required to, update their packages to use the new macros. | |||
<!-- 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: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues # | * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues/10819 #10819] <!-- 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 --> | ||
* Policies and guidelines: | * Policies and guidelines: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
<!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature? If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done? If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. Please submit a pull request with the proposed changes before submitting your Change proposal. --> | <!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature? If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done? If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. Please submit a pull request with the proposed changes before submitting your Change proposal. --> | ||
** The Fedora packaging policy will be updated to require that packages that want to use additional flag use the new macros. | |||
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) | * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) | ||
| Line 105: | Line 121: | ||
== Upgrade/compatibility impact == | == Upgrade/compatibility impact == | ||
None. | |||
<!-- What happens to systems that have had a previous versions of Fedora installed and are updated to the version containing this change? Will anything require manual configuration or data migration? Will any existing functionality be no longer supported? --> | <!-- What happens to systems that have had a previous versions of Fedora installed and are updated to the version containing this change? Will anything require manual configuration or data migration? Will any existing functionality be no longer supported? --> | ||
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
== How To Test == | == How To Test == | ||
* This can be tested by inspecting the value of the %{build_cflags}, %{build_cxxflags}, %{build_fflags}, and %{build_ldflags} and ensuring they are the same before and after the change. | |||
* This can be tested by modifying some of the new macros in a spec file and ensuring that the changes appear in the appropriate macro mentioned above. | |||
<!-- This does not need to be a full-fledged document. Describe the dimensions of tests that this change implementation is expected to pass when it is done. If it needs to be tested with different hardware or software configurations, indicate them. The more specific you can be, the better the community testing can be. | <!-- This does not need to be a full-fledged document. Describe the dimensions of tests that this change implementation is expected to pass when it is done. If it needs to be tested with different hardware or software configurations, indicate them. The more specific you can be, the better the community testing can be. | ||
| Line 124: | Line 141: | ||
3. What are the expected results of those actions? | 3. What are the expected results of those actions? | ||
--> | --> | ||
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
== User Experience == | == User Experience == | ||
This is a change for developers and will have no impact to the user experience. | |||
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result? | <!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result? | ||
| Line 142: | Line 158: | ||
== Dependencies == | == Dependencies == | ||
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package? Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends? In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate? Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? --> | <!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package? Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends? In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate? Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? --> | ||
None. | |||
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
== Contingency Plan == | == Contingency Plan == | ||
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan? This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration". Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages). If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy. --> | <!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan? This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration". Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages). If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy. --> | ||
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) | * Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) Change owner will revert the update to redhat-rpm-config. <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
<!-- 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: | * Contingency deadline: Beta freeze <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
<!-- 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? N/A (not a System Wide Change), | * Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change), No <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
== Documentation == | == Documentation == | ||
| Line 160: | Line 174: | ||
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> | ||
None. | |||
== Release Notes == | == Release Notes == | ||
| Line 168: | Line 182: | ||
Release Notes are not required for initial draft of the Change Proposal but has to be completed by the Change Freeze. | Release Notes are not required for initial draft of the Change Proposal but has to be completed by the Change Freeze. | ||
--> | --> | ||
None. | |||
Latest revision as of 14:29, 10 February 2023
RPM Macros for Build Flags
Summary
Create "extra flag" macros to make it easier for packages to add to the default list of compiler flags.
Owner
- Name: Tom Stellard
- Email: <tstellar@redhat.com>
Current status
- Targeted release: Fedora Linux 38
- Last updated: 2023-02-10
- devel thread
- FESCo issue: #2805
- Tracker bug: #2100610
- Release notes tracker: <will not assigned by the Wrangler -- not user-facing>
Detailed Description
The macros file in the redhat-rpm-config package contains a list of default compiler flags for packages to use when compiling C, C++, and Fortran packages. This change will add new macros to redhat-rpm-config which will make it easier for packages to add their own compiler flags.
The proposed macros for adding new flags are:
%_pkg_extra_cflags %_pkg_extra_cxxflags %_pkg_extra_fflags %_pkg_extra_ldflags
These will be added to %{build_cflags}, %{build_cxxflags}, %{build_fflags}, and %{build_ldflags} respectively to allow packages to add their own flags to the default list: e.g.
%build_cflags %{optflags} %{_pkg_extra_cflags}
Feedback
The original proposal would have replaced every existing compiler flag in redhat-rpm-config with it's own macro. However, it was determined that this may be a little bit too confusing since there would be ambiguity about whether, for example, %global _flag_f_exceptions %{nil} would actually disable exceptions by adding -fno-exceptions to the flags or if it would just remove the -fexceptions flag. Rather than hold up other useful and fairly straight-forward changes in this proposal, the proposal owners decided to drop the flag macros from this proposal. It could be revisited in a later release.
Benefit to Fedora
- It will provide a standard way to add to the list of default compiler flags.
- It will make it easier to determine which packages add compiler flags by doing a simple grep of the spec files.
- It will make it easier for toolchain developers to experiment with adding new flags to the distribution as this can be done with a simple macro definition instead of patching redhat-rpm-config.
Scope
- Proposal owners:
- Proposal owners will update the redhat-rpm-config package and add the new macros.
- Proposal owners will test the changes to ensure that the correct flags are still being used.
- Other developers:
- Other developers may, but are not required to, update their packages to use the new macros.
- Release engineering: #10819
- Policies and guidelines:
- The Fedora packaging policy will be updated to require that packages that want to use additional flag use the new macros.
- Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
- Alignment with Objectives:
Upgrade/compatibility impact
None.
How To Test
- This can be tested by inspecting the value of the %{build_cflags}, %{build_cxxflags}, %{build_fflags}, and %{build_ldflags} and ensuring they are the same before and after the change.
- This can be tested by modifying some of the new macros in a spec file and ensuring that the changes appear in the appropriate macro mentioned above.
User Experience
This is a change for developers and will have no impact to the user experience.
Dependencies
None.
Contingency Plan
- Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) Change owner will revert the update to redhat-rpm-config.
- Contingency deadline: Beta freeze
- Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change), No
Documentation
None.
Release Notes
None.