Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: arm@g.o, zerochaos@g.o, blueness@g.o, dilfridge@g.o, dlan@g.o, maekke@g.o, nerdboy@g.o, vapier@g.o, xmw@g.o, zlogene@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-dns/dnssec-root: Blind stable on arm, critical bug 667774
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 07:28:42
Message-Id: 20181012082828.7fba265c@sf
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-dns/dnssec-root: Blind stable on arm, critical bug 667774 by Thomas Deutschmann
1 On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 02:40:38 +0200
2 Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 2018-10-12 01:38, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
5 > >> Maybe it is time to destabilize ARM on Gentoo to stop the impression
6 > >> that we really support ARM.
7 > >
8 > > [ CC: arm@ ]
9 > >
10 > > A few points to think about:
11 > >
12 > > 1. I have read this as a direct statement that ARM is not maintained.
13 > > I don't think it is a fair (or constructive) assessment of team's work
14 > > on ARM front.
15 >
16 > See the ARM bug queue for stable requests. ARM is always last and behind
17 > since we dropped HPPA.
18
19 I agree it lags. I disagree it's not maintained (I disagree HPPA is not
20 maintained either but let's leave it for another day). Let's wait for arm@ input.
21
22 I'm CCing all members as listed in https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:ARM directly:
23 zerochaos@
24 [skip alicef@ (kernel stabilization)]
25 blueness@
26 dilfridge@
27 dlan@
28 maekke@
29 nerdboy@
30 vapier@
31 xmw@
32 zlogene@
33
34 And asking a few the questions directly (zerochaos@ as a lead and the arm@ team):
35
36 a) If you are not planning to do any arm@ work in short term can you remove
37 yourself from project's wiki page?
38
39 b) Can you update your status in arm project to mention if you are
40 doing any stabilization work so people could contact you occasionally?
41
42 c) Is it in your opinion worth keeping arm@ stable? (Do you use stable, do you
43 expect people to use stable, etc.)
44
45 Thanks!
46
47 > > 2. The bug was created less than a week ago and was not communicated
48 > > explicitly as urgent on #gentoo-arm. I see failure to handle the bug
49 > > as a communication failure and not a team's death signal.
50 > >
51 > > Were there any attempts to reach out to the teams or just arm users?
52 >
53 > Bug was assigned highest priority in bugzilla. But it looks like ARM arch
54 > team is ignoring set priority.
55
56 I personally don't filter emails by priority either. I guess I should now :)
57
58 > *I* didn't asked in #gentoo-arm but I pinged project several times in
59 > #gentoo-dev channel.
60
61 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:ARM explicitly lists #gentoo-arm.
62 In my experience there are quite a few active users of arm.
63
64 > Disclaimer: I am not the maintainer of unbound nor dnssec-root package. I took
65 > action last week after I noticed that there was a time bomb ticking and
66 > nobody cared. I fully agree that an updated dnssec-root package could have been
67 > made available one year ago giving everyone enough time...
68
69 Do we do anything about it? Post GLSA, news item, gento-users@, anything to get
70 users notified? Or just leave them uninformed?
71
72 > > 4. net-dns/dnssec-root is used by a single(ish) package in tree: net-dns/unbound
73 > >
74 > > Which is: not a system package, not a default package, not suggested by handbook
75 > > package, can operate without DNSSEC enabled.
76 >
77 > Unbound is a popular resolver and many Gentoo users are operating ARM-based
78 > routers. I don't get your point. Of course you could disable DNSSEC and DNS
79 > will resume working. But is this really your point?
80 >
81 > > While annoying it's not going to lock users out or corrupt their data.
82 >
83 > Right, it doesn't cause data corruption. But when your Gentoo-based router
84 > will stop working this can be a problem. Don't forget about remote systems.
85 > Again, people who know how to deal with problems like that aren't the
86 > problem. But why do we care about stable packages if we assume that everyone
87 > knows what to do when experiencing problems?
88
89 My point that this bug is not critical. Broken software happens all the time.
90 I can understand why you think otherwise.
91
92 > > 5. net-dns/dnssec-root is a plain-text file package. It should have been ALLARCHES
93 > > stablewithout involvement of arm@.
94 >
95 > It wasn't about dnssec-root package. Of course this could have been stabilized
96 > under ALLARCHES policy. It wasn't because package has a new dependency
97 > (>=dev-perl/XML-XPath-1.420.0 + deps) which was lacking stable keywords, too.
98
99 Thank you! That was not clear from the bug.
100
101 > If ARM can keep up I am quiet. But please, be honest. We don't need another
102 > HPPA. Nobody will win something if we tell world "ARM is a first class citizen
103 > in Gentoo" when it isn't (anymore). But if people would know it is ~ARCH, we
104 > would not disappoint expectations.
105
106 I think arm@ is the best decider here.
107
108 --
109
110 Sergei