2025-12-10 15:31:05 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
2025-12-10 15:31:06 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-12-10 15:31:05 UTC
2025-12-10 15:31:06 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
2025-12-10 15:31:19 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !topic roll call
2025-12-10 15:31:21 <@siosm:matrix.org> !hi
2025-12-10 15:31:24 <@ydesouza:fedora.im> !hi
2025-12-10 15:31:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Yasmin Valim de Souza (ydesouza)
2025-12-10 15:31:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Timothée Ravier (siosm) - he / him / his
2025-12-10 15:31:27 <@spresti:fedora.im> !hi
2025-12-10 15:31:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Steven Presti (spresti)
2025-12-10 15:31:43 <@hricky:fedora.im> !hi
2025-12-10 15:31:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Hristo Marinov (hricky) - he / him / his
2025-12-10 15:33:00 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !hi
2025-12-10 15:33:02 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Dusty Mabe (dustymabe) - he / him / his
2025-12-10 15:33:06 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> !hi ravanelli
2025-12-10 15:33:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Renata Ravanelli (ravanelli)
2025-12-10 15:34:30 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !topic Action items from last meeting
2025-12-10 15:34:59 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !info There are no action items from the last meeting.
2025-12-10 15:35:11 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !topic Review Fedora 44 Release Schedule
2025-12-10 15:35:20 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-44/f-44-key-tasks.html
2025-12-10 15:36:29 <@marmijo:fedora.im> The first Fedora 44 change checkpoint is a week from today. If we have anything related to infrastructure changes, we should work on submitting it soon
2025-12-10 15:37:24 <@marmijo:fedora.im> There's another checkpoint, for system wide changes or those requiring mass rebuilds, in two weeks 
2025-12-10 15:37:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> PSA: get your change requests submitted for F44
2025-12-10 15:38:34 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !info Fedora 44 change deadlines are rapidly approaching. Please submit your change requests soon!
2025-12-10 15:39:23 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !topic tracker: Fedora 44 changes considerations
2025-12-10 15:39:35 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/2063
2025-12-10 15:40:45 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Stand by, i'm reviewing last week's meeting log
2025-12-10 15:42:14 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Okay, we covered only 107 last week. Let's start with 108
2025-12-10 15:42:18 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_ninja_default
2025-12-10 15:43:24 <@marmijo:fedora.im> I don't think we use cmake for our upstream packages.
2025-12-10 15:44:29 <@marmijo:fedora.im> 109 is also related to cmake, so I think we can skip it
2025-12-10 15:44:32 <@marmijo:fedora.im> stop me if I'm wrong...
2025-12-10 15:44:35 <@marmijo:fedora.im> let's move on to 110
2025-12-10 15:44:37 <@spresti:fedora.im> well
2025-12-10 15:45:07 <@spresti:fedora.im> We do use the macro "make_install" which that change request says to make sure not to use => example  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ignition/blob/rawhide/f/ignition.spec
2025-12-10 15:45:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> good catch
2025-12-10 15:46:03 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't think that will impact us as this should only matter in the context of cmake builds
2025-12-10 15:46:39 <@siosm:matrix.org> looking at the guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
2025-12-10 15:48:41 <@spresti:fedora.im> Hmm okay, its just a bit concerning that the change request is calling out that macro. 
2025-12-10 15:49:08 <@siosm:matrix.org> here it's for our own makefile that we have in https://github.com/coreos/ignition/blob/main/Makefile
2025-12-10 15:49:24 <@siosm:matrix.org> for the cmake case, the Makefile is generated by the CMake tooling itself
2025-12-10 15:49:37 <@siosm:matrix.org> thus the need to use the corresponding macros
2025-12-10 15:50:02 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ahhh I see, thank you for explaining that.
2025-12-10 15:50:36 <@siosm:matrix.org> in this case there won't even be a Makefile as the build will use ninja insteada
2025-12-10 15:50:56 <@siosm:matrix.org> so %make_install will not even work
2025-12-10 15:51:54 <@siosm:matrix.org> I think it's safe to skip for us. I don't think we have CMake based packages
2025-12-10 15:52:17 <@siosm:matrix.org> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpm-ostree/blob/rawhide/f/rpm-ostree.spec#_86
2025-12-10 15:52:30 <@siosm:matrix.org> ok we do?
2025-12-10 15:53:19 <@siosm:matrix.org> ok it's for libdnf
2025-12-10 15:54:47 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Thanks for finding that! So we do have some work on these two changes.
2025-12-10 15:55:08 <@siosm:matrix.org> I still don't think so
2025-12-10 15:56:39 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Ok, looks like the change for CMAKE 4.0 only affects packages that specify `cmake_minimum_required`
2025-12-10 15:56:48 <@siosm:matrix.org> let's make an issue to track investigation
2025-12-10 15:57:00 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Will do!
2025-12-10 15:57:03 <@siosm:matrix.org> I'll paste my investigations there
2025-12-10 15:57:11 <@jcapitao:matrix.org> !hi
2025-12-10 15:57:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Joel Capitao (jcapitao) - he / him / his
2025-12-10 15:57:37 <@marmijo:fedora.im> 110
2025-12-10 15:57:37 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/KojiServiceImageBuilderRemoval
2025-12-10 16:00:07 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> We never used that service anyway since we call osbuild directly in COSA 
2025-12-10 16:00:09 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> We are using osbuild directly, the only koji packages we use are for Brew
2025-12-10 16:00:20 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> But not these ones
2025-12-10 16:00:49 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Ok, that's what I thought, we use osbuild by other means
2025-12-10 16:01:00 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Ok, that's what I thought, we use osbuild <del>by</del> through other means
2025-12-10 16:01:23 <@marmijo:fedora.im> 112:
2025-12-10 16:01:23 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enforcing_signature_checking_by_default
2025-12-10 16:03:36 <@marmijo:fedora.im> We already rely on signed repos, but will this affect laying abilities?
2025-12-10 16:04:59 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> marmijo: good question
2025-12-10 16:05:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I know `rpm-ostree` uses a forked version of libdnf. I'm not sure if that comes into play here or not
2025-12-10 16:05:43 <@siosm:matrix.org> I think it will likely impact layering of unsigned packages
2025-12-10 16:06:08 <@marmijo:fedora.im> We already rely on signed repos, but will this affect <del>laying</del> layering abilities?
2025-12-10 16:06:23 <@siosm:matrix.org> we'll need a tracker for that upstream in rpm-ostree
2025-12-10 16:06:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> yeah, and we probably don't (or won't) have a way to disable it when `rpm-ostree install` is called
2025-12-10 16:07:00 <@siosm:matrix.org> easiest workaround will be to sign the package and import the key locally
2025-12-10 16:07:09 <@siosm:matrix.org> will likely* be
2025-12-10 16:07:46 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> or define your own RPM macro that undoes `%_pkgverify_level` ?
2025-12-10 16:09:41 <@marmijo:fedora.im> I'll open a tracker issue in rpm-ostree and link it to the change considerations tracker so we can investigate the change 
2025-12-10 16:09:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> keep in mind we don't offer signed repositories, only repositories with signed packages
2025-12-10 16:10:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there is a difference, and if you mess the settings up, you could break consuming fedora content
2025-12-10 16:10:59 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I _think_ the dnf team adapted dnf4 libdnf for rpm6
2025-12-10 16:11:07 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so this should work with the right repo settings
2025-12-10 16:11:09 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> marmijo: would be great to have a tracker issue in the FCOS issue too so we can revisit periodically 
2025-12-10 16:12:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nothing sticks out as adapting for this, so this will need to be raised to the rpm team to prioritize
2025-12-10 16:13:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this is something y'all will have to do, as I have no power to raise this
2025-12-10 16:13:30 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Conan Kudo: to prioritize fixing dnf4 libdnf for this? 
2025-12-10 16:13:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> once libdnf is adapted, rebasing the submodule will be sufficient
2025-12-10 16:13:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes
2025-12-10 16:13:48 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> yeah, fully expect a hard no on that one. and they'd probably be right 
2025-12-10 16:14:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> well the other option is telling rpm-ostree to propagate the macro to librpm
2025-12-10 16:14:21 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> like it does with dbpath
2025-12-10 16:14:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> to set it to the "old" behavior
2025-12-10 16:16:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> also...
2025-12-10 16:16:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-12-10 16:16:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-12-10 16:17:04 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/golang1.26
2025-12-10 16:17:04 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Let's move on to 113
2025-12-10 16:18:37 <@marmijo:fedora.im> This will most definitely affect FCOS. I'm not sure what version(s) of GO we're using in our packages now, but I'll open a tracker for this so we can make sure to get them all upgraded/synced
2025-12-10 16:18:57 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> hopefully it won't be as painful as 1.24 was
2025-12-10 16:19:36 <@marmijo:fedora.im> I hope not!
2025-12-10 16:19:47 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hardlink_identical_files_in_packages_by_default
2025-12-10 16:19:47 <@marmijo:fedora.im> change 204
2025-12-10 16:20:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this shouldn't impact you negatively since rpm-ostree does the same thing implicitly
2025-12-10 16:20:47 <@siosm:matrix.org> yep
2025-12-10 16:20:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it may result in some packages being broken due to automatic hardlinking, but I doubt any of those are part of the FCOS stack
2025-12-10 16:21:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> heads-up though: you can hit weird sharp edges where koji thinks noarch packages are being build wrong across arches
2025-12-10 16:21:37 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because the way hardlinking works might result in subtle differences
2025-12-10 16:21:44 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this bit us with some LXQt packages
2025-12-10 16:23:05 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Okay, i'll make a note that we should be stay alert when the change lands, but there should be no impact to FCOS
2025-12-10 16:23:34 <@marmijo:fedora.im> we can probably get to one or two more
2025-12-10 16:23:41 <@marmijo:fedora.im> 209
2025-12-10 16:23:41 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/cmark-0.31
2025-12-10 16:24:29 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't think we include that
2025-12-10 16:25:21 <@marmijo:fedora.im> change 211
2025-12-10 16:25:21 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Nix_package_tool
2025-12-10 16:25:27 <@siosm:matrix.org> We don't include Nix :)
2025-12-10 16:25:33 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Looks like a new tool/package being added to Fedora
2025-12-10 16:25:52 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah, it'll probably be more of a concern for atomic desktops
2025-12-10 16:26:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> you might want to preinstall nix-filesystem though
2025-12-10 16:26:18 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so that the directory exists in your images
2025-12-10 16:26:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> some people will do nix on coreos and without that, it'll break
2025-12-10 16:27:07 <@siosm:matrix.org> we've had requests but I'm not a fan
2025-12-10 16:27:15 <@siosm:matrix.org> anyway, for another meeting :)
2025-12-10 16:27:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'm not either, but there you go :)
2025-12-10 16:28:12 <@hricky:fedora.im> Neither do I, if that matters at all. ;)
2025-12-10 16:28:31 <@marmijo:fedora.im> 116 (not added to the tracker yet)
2025-12-10 16:28:31 <@marmijo:fedora.im> last one...
2025-12-10 16:28:31 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseKmsconVTConsole
2025-12-10 16:28:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this does affect you
2025-12-10 16:29:13 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and probably deserves a meeting of its own to figure out (or at least a ticket)
2025-12-10 16:30:21 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Yeah, let's cover it in the next meeting. We're at time now
2025-12-10 16:30:48 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2025-12-10 16:31:26 <@marmijo:fedora.im> I'll close the meeting in a few minutes if there's nothing to discuss here :)
2025-12-10 16:32:36 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Thanks all for joining!
2025-12-10 16:32:46 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !endmeeting