From Fedora Project Wiki
(Created page with "<!-- 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 --> =...")
 
No edit summary
Line 89: Line 89:


== Scope ==
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners: Update packaging guidelines to mention the automatic removal of `*.la` files and mention the mechanism for opting out of this behavior.
* Proposal owners:  
** Update packaging guidelines to mention the automatic removal of `*.la` files and mention the mechanism for opting out of this behavior.
<!-- 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:
* Other developers: For the packages already removing their `*.la` files manually, there should be no change. For packages that want to install such packages, the package maintainers need to opt out of the automatic removal.  
** For the packages already removing their `*.la` files manually, there should be no change. For packages that want to install such packages, the package maintainers need to opt out of the automatic removal.  


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
Line 132: Line 133:


== User Experience ==
== User Experience ==
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result?


This section partially overlaps with the Benefit to Fedora section above. This section should be primarily about the User Experience, written in a way that does not assume deep technical knowledge. More detailed technical description should be left for the Benefit to Fedora section.
Users should not notice any change.
 
Describe what Users will see or notice, for example:
  - Packages are compressed more efficiently, making downloads and upgrades faster by 10%.
  - Kerberos tickets can be renewed automatically. Users will now have to authenticate less and become more productive. Credential management improvements mean a user can start their work day with a single sign on and not have to pause for reauthentication during their entire day.
- Libreoffice is one of the most commonly installed applications on Fedora and it is now available by default to help users "hit the ground running".
- Green has been scientifically proven to be the most relaxing color. The move to a default background color of green with green text will result in Fedora users being the most relaxed users of any operating system.
-->


== 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)? -->
There are no dependencies. Only `redhat-rpm-config` needs to adapt to the change.
 
<!-- 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?) N/A (not a System Wide Change)  <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Contingency mechanism: The change can simply be reverted in the `redhat-rpm-config` package. Packages that have already removed the manual deletion of `*.la` files need to revert this change too. Packages that have opted out of the automatic `*.la` file removal don't need to do anything.
 
<!-- 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: N/A (not a System Wide Change) <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* 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), Yes/No <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Blocks release? Yes <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->




Line 162: Line 153:
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this change, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this change, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
Pull request implementing `%__brp_remove_la_files` in the upstream rpm repository: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1674
N/A (not a System Wide Change)
 


== Release Notes ==
== Release Notes ==
Line 171: Line 162:
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.  
-->
-->
The [https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.17.0 RPM 4.17 release notes] simply state "Add policy for removing .la files from buildroot by default".

Revision as of 12:02, 21 October 2021


Remove .la files from buildroot

Summary

Autools/libtool-based projects frequently install files ending in .la in their make install. These files are usually unwanted. Many projects therefore end up with a variation of find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name "*.la" -delete in their %install section.

This changes proposes to instead use the %__brp_remove_la_files macro in redhat-rpm-config's %__os_install_post to remove the *.la files automatically. This has been added to RPM 4.17.


Owner


Current status

  • Targeted release: Fedora Linux 36
  • Last updated: 2021-10-21
  • FESCo issue: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Release notes tracker: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>

Detailed Description

Feedback

Benefit to Fedora

This change removes a widely used line of shell script from many spec files. The advantage is cleaner and easier to maintain spec files as well as more sensible defaults for rpm package builds.


Scope

  • Proposal owners:
    • Update packaging guidelines to mention the automatic removal of *.la files and mention the mechanism for opting out of this behavior.
  • Other developers:
    • For the packages already removing their *.la files manually, there should be no change. For packages that want to install such packages, the package maintainers need to opt out of the automatic removal.


  • Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
  • Alignment with Objectives:

Upgrade/compatibility impact

How To Test

User Experience

Users should not notice any change.

Dependencies

There are no dependencies. Only redhat-rpm-config needs to adapt to the change.

Contingency Plan

  • Contingency mechanism: The change can simply be reverted in the redhat-rpm-config package. Packages that have already removed the manual deletion of *.la files need to revert this change too. Packages that have opted out of the automatic *.la file removal don't need to do anything.
  • Contingency deadline: beta freeze
  • Blocks release? Yes


Documentation

Pull request implementing %__brp_remove_la_files in the upstream rpm repository: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1674


Release Notes

The RPM 4.17 release notes simply state "Add policy for removing .la files from buildroot by default".

Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/RemoveLaFiles&oldid=628723"