FS#53289 - [rfc] Should use the single unified release tarball

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by brent saner (sanerb) - Monday, 13 March 2017, 14:45 GMT
Last edited by Sergej Pupykin (sergej) - Thursday, 21 June 2018, 17:14 GMT
Task Type General Gripe
Category Packages
Status Closed
Assigned To Sergej Pupykin (sergej)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:

The rfc package should use the tarball found at:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/tar/RFC-all.tar.gz

instead. Currently it uses the "bundles". The "-all" tarball includes all RFCs including recent ones (I suspect they automatically re-generate it when an RFC is published).

This, combined with monthly version bumps, should ensure a much higher quality package that isn't 3/4 a year outdated (since roughly 20 new RFCs are added each month).
This task depends upon

Closed by  Sergej Pupykin (sergej)
Thursday, 21 June 2018, 17:14 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 13:39 GMT
If this tarball constantly changes, it's not really an option. We need to be able to rebuild the same package on rebuilds.
Comment by brent saner (sanerb) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 13:43 GMT
so you're telling me, doug, that it's more acceptable to have a collection of RFCs that are 8 months (or more) out of date than a package that would not be able to be rebuilt.
Comment by brent saner (sanerb) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 13:44 GMT
(ignoring, of course, that the package hasn't even included the newer batched tarballs as well)

EDIT:
scratch that, updated yesterday to include newer releases

EDIT2:
however, it ALSO includes https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/tar/RFCs8001-latest.tar.gz, which DOES change. so is your argument valid, doug, or is the maintainer incorrect in adding that source?

live version:
[bts@cylon ~]$ curl -sL https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/tar/RFCs8001-latest.tar.gz | sha256sum
b4aac946dba8c73a03ac88958249252625d71ced5026fde577706b8d3e28d16d -


pkgbuild has 9fcc3c9fec46a8286ee72f0f521d092aa171cc61b840f025691ea4d8ae7c9634 showing that yes, it regularly changes, yet is included in the PKGBUILD. if this is included, why not just use the -All tarball instead?
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 13:53 GMT
You're right, that's not really usable, either
Comment by brent saner (sanerb) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 14:00 GMT
Sergej-

Might I offer a possible solution?

Instead of packaging the tarballs themselves, instead package a cronjob and simple script that simply fetches https://www.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/tar/RFC-all.tar.gz and unpacks it to /usr/share/doc/rfc/txt (pdf versions also available) according to the packaged cronjob. That way the package will have very little changes from its sources (only a cronjob and a script), and the RFCs will be kept updated regularly. Unfortunately, it ALSO depends on a reliable network connection on the client it's installed on- so that's a downfall.

(alternatively, there is this: https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietf-cli/ )

I'm not sure of a clean way to do this if Doug's objection is, in actuality, a requirement of packages.
Comment by Levente Polyak (anthraxx) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 14:35 GMT
Nope, replacing package content with a cronjob that pulls them is not a solution at all, however if that's what you wish to do, do it yourself.


either way, yes it is bad if sources are non-deterministic and change, this would kill reproducible builds afford and even without that should sources be deterministic per se.
One variation would be to store the latest non-deterministic tarball with a timestamp/date on our archlinux archive, use a according pkgver and pull non-deterministic sources from our infra instead.
This could be updated here and there if required and still be a proper and deterministic package with actual content.
Comment by brent saner (sanerb) - Tuesday, 14 March 2017, 14:39 GMT
I wasn't even aware hosting something on Arch infra was even a possibility! Yes, by far that'd probably be the best way to accomplish things.

Loading...