February 2024 - Arch-dev-public - lists.archlinux.org

zlib-ng
by Jelle van der Waa 11 Nov '24

11 Nov '24

Hey All, I noticed Fedora is discussing switching from zlib to zlib-ng. zlib-ng is a fork of zlib, which seems to offer ~ 40% better performance and a new API. We have about ~ 1000 packages depending on zlib, zlib-ng does offer a compat option to keep zlib API compatibility. [1] # Proposal From a discussion in #archlinux-staff. It was determined that a possible plan would be to introduce zlib-ng as package in [extra] with the modern API enabled, we can then migrate packages over that are compatible to the new API. A zlib-ng-compat package can be provided, as proposed by Fedora, that activates the zlib API compatibility mode and directly provides libz.so. This package can provide/conflict the original zlib package, and potentially be target to replace zlib all together. In short: zlib-ng would provide libz-ng.so zlib-ng-compat would provide libz.so # Packages which might be able to use zlib-ng Alpine offers a package which has 6 required packages.[2] Debian's codesearch suggests a few packages seem to mention a possible zlib-ng compatibility. [3] These notes where written down last Thursday, in the meantime, Anthraxx uploaded zlib-ng to [extra], so we can start switching packages which use the modern API over. Replacing zlib with zlib-ng-compact is something we need to discuss, I've overheard so far that some test suites fail because they check the compressed test artifact's hash which with zlib-ng can be different. [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel%40lists.fedoraproject.o… [2] https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/package/edge/community/x86/zlib-ng [3] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=zlib-ng&literal=1&perpkg=1 Greetings, Jelle van der Waa & Anthraxx

3 3

Python 3.12
by Jelle van der Waa 21 Apr '24

21 Apr '24

Hi all, We should get started on Python 3.12, 3.13 alpha is already getting released! To be 100% honest, I am not super looking forward to it as it's a ton of work due to our lack of automated tooling. In basics a plan would be to first tackle low hanging fruit to-do's: * https://archlinux.org/todo/pytest-runner-removal/ * https://archlinux.org/todo/imp-module-removal-in-python-312/ * https://archlinux.org/todo/use-pyprojecttoml-for-building-if-supported/ * drop unused python modules in our repo https://archlinux.org/devel/reports/unneeded-orphans/ We've finished python-bootstrap, and can bootstrap the required build packages (python-setuptools, build, etc.). And figuring out the rebuild order. (Big thanks to david, for the help here!) [1] [2] So soon we can start the rebuild which will probably take a while to complete as we have no good automated tooling yet for mass rebuilds. This rebuild will likely block [staging] for a good 2 or more weeks, so when would be a good time to schedule this? I expect two things to break our package builds in 3.12: * The removal of distutils see the snippet below, adding python-setuptools to makedepends should resolve this. For example: GISCAN ZBar-1.0.gir Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/g-ir-scanner", line 99, in <module> from giscanner.utils import dll_dirs File "/usr/lib/gobject-introspection/giscanner/utils.py", line 385, in <module> import distutils.cygwinccompiler ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'distutils' * The removal of the imp module, the todo list above has been open for a while, but not all packages have been fixed. * The usual failing tests, missing sources you know it :) [1] https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/python-bootstrap/-/merge_requests/3 [2] https://notes.vdwaa.nl/arch/python.html Greetings, Jelle

2 6

RFC Final Comment Period: Create new AUR moderator role
by Torsten Keßler 16 Mar '24

16 Mar '24

An RFC has now entered its Final Comment Period. In 14 days, discussion will end and the proposal will either be accepted, rejected or withdrawn https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/19 Please visit the above link for the discussion. Summary: Create a dedicated role for the moderation of the AUR that supports and eventually replaces the Package Maintainers as the current moderators.

1 1

Consolidating our mkinitcpio hooks
by Morten Linderud 03 Mar '24

03 Mar '24

Hi, Currently we have a lot of our mkinitcpio hooks in several packages which has never been consolidated. This makes it confusing where stuff belong and what is provided where, and I really want to consolidate everything. It would help keeping up the development of the hooks, patch everything and ultimately write a test suite for mkinitcpio. I also have long term plans on moving the default hooks from busybox to systemd, but this will happen at a later point. Initially I really want to move the hooks from `cryptsetup` and `systemd`: * encrypt and sd-encrypt from core/cryptsetup * systemd and udev from core/systemd We could maybe consider a few other hooks from [core] depending on peoples opinion? We are missing a good networking hook for systemd, and that should preferably be solved at some point. A list of possibly other relevant mkinitcpio stuff: Hook Package * btrfs btrfs-progs * dmraid dmraid * mdadm mdadm * mdadm_udev mdadm * lvm2 lvm2 * sd-lvm2 lvm2 * net mkinitcpio-nfs-utils * netconf mkinitcpio-netconf # Migration It's unclear to me how we should best move these hooks. We would need to merge them upstream into `mkinitcpio` first, then remove them from the packages. Is a news item is enough for this? Or do we want to include a couple of package constraints to ensure people are accidentally removing their hooks? What are peoples opinions? -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16

5 10

GHC 9.2.8 enters [extra-testing]
by Felix Yan 26 Feb '24

26 Feb '24

Hi all, The long delayed GHC 9.2.x updates have been done and moved to [extra-testing]. There are a few notable changes regarding our GHC packaging: - Codegen backend has been switched back to NCG for multiple reasons: = GHC doesn't support latest LLVM and was using llvm14 in Arch. This adds up to our maintenance burden of LLVM. (IIRC LLVM 15 support was fixed only recently.) = LLVM backend actually generates slower code. We have evaluated the changes during the past years and noticed as large as 50% slower results in some benchmarks. I also got similar information from other distribution people. = LLVM backend sometimes deadlocks on compile-time. I hit this from time to time and it's not easy to reproduce reliably. (There are similar issues that are always reproducible, but got fixed already.) All `--ghc-option=-fllvm` has been removed from PKGBUILDs during the rebuild. - Build system of GHC itself has been switched to Hadrian. - Some obsolete packages have been retired from the distribution, and will be removed once the batch enters [extra]: haskell-bytestring-show haskell-random-source haskell-brittany haskell-hls-brittany-plugin haskell-hls-tactics-plugin haskell-hls-haddock-comments-plugin A lot of thanks to @Vekhir who helped me a lot for preparing this so that it's done much earlier and smoother than I expected :) As always, please report any issues and have fun! -- Regards, Felix Yan

1 0

RFC: Distribution Developer Manual
by Levente Polyak 24 Feb '24

24 Feb '24

A new RFC (request for comment) has been opened here: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/21 Please visit the above link for discussion. Summary: This RFC proposes the migration of Arch Linux's operational distro specifications from existing ArchWiki and other sources to a dedicated GitLab Developer Manual repository. The intention is to document how to run the distribution while leveraging GitLab's collaboration features and streamlined workflows for maintaining and evolving the resulting specifications. This change aims to centralize and enhance the efficiency of specification management while preserving the integrity of the community-contributed content in the Wiki. This request for comments is superseding `RFC-0005 <https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/5>`_ by extending its scope to handle all distro specifications coherently instead of handling a single sub section (packaging guidelines) differently to others.

1 0

Arch Linux in January 2024
by Levente Polyak 14 Feb '24

14 Feb '24

## Staff We would like to welcome [Vladimir LAVALLADE (Erus Iluvatar)][0] to their new role as ArchWiki Administrator. ## Infrastructure The DevOps team has recently provisioned a new EPYC 9454P build server for Arch Linux packaging. This high-performance server is meant to streamline the packaging process, ensuring more efficient building of resource hungry package builds. ## mkinitcpio mkinitcpio [v37.2][1] and [v37.3][2] have been released. These releases include numerous bug fixes, such as patches addressing inflated initramfs sizes and resolving issues with kernel images located in non-standard locations. ## RFC An [RFC has been proposed][3] to add ``-fno-omit-frame-pointer`` and ``-mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer`` to the default compilation flags to improve the effectiveness of profiling and debugging tools. Additionally, an [RFC has been proposed][4] to define new mirror administration routines and mirror requirements. This RFC outlines the requirements, definitions and guidelines surrounding not only becoming but also maintaining and decommissioning a mirror. ## Packaging ### Firefox The [firefox][5] and [firefox-developer-edition][6] packages have been updated to include regular debug packages. As part of this update, symbols are no longer submitted to Mozilla at the end of the build process. Instead, [Mozilla retrieves all symbols from our end][7]. This change enables local debugging of Firefox while still allowing the submission of useful crash reports to Mozilla and leveraging their profiling service. ### Statistics In this month, we've successfully rolled out 11068 package updates addressing various enhancements and rebuilds, including 2777 package upgrades. Additionally, we've received 204 new package issues, while resolving a total of 258 issues. [0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/ArchWiki:News#2024/01/07_-_New_administrat… [1]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/mkinitcpio/mkinitcpio/-/releases/v37… [2]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/mkinitcpio/mkinitcpio/-/releases/v37… [3]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/26 [4]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/29/diffs [5]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/firefox/-/commit/… [6]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/firefox-developer… [7]: https://github.com/mozilla/symbol-scrapers/pull/41

1 0

dropping opera
by Ike Devolder 08 Feb '24

08 Feb '24

Hi, Since I have not really used opera for years, I'm finally going to drop it from the repo's. If someone wants it, feel free to adopt it. Else I will drop it to AUR in 2 weeks. --Ike

1 1

RFC Final Comment Period: Add -fno-omit-frame-pointer and -mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer to default compilation flags
by Morten Linderud 06 Feb '24

06 Feb '24

An RFC has now entered its Final Comment Period. In 14 days, discussion will end and the proposal will either be accepted, rejected or withdrawn https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/26 Please visit the above link for the discussion. Summary: Add ``-fno-omit-frame-pointer`` and ``-mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer`` to the default compilation flags to improve the effectiveness of profiling and debugging tools. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16

1 2