Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RPM packages built in OBS have an unexpected revision format #3221

Open
xmudrii opened this issue Aug 23, 2023 · 8 comments
Open

RPM packages built in OBS have an unexpected revision format #3221

xmudrii opened this issue Aug 23, 2023 · 8 comments
Labels
area/release-eng Issues or PRs related to the Release Engineering subproject kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release.

Comments

@xmudrii
Copy link
Member

xmudrii commented Aug 23, 2023

RPM packages built in OBS have a revision format such as <version>-<number>.<x>.<y>. <x>.<y> part is expected and present for Debian packages as well, see this thread for more details: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C03U7N0VCGK/p1692093586272139?thread_ts=1691738497.514679&cid=C03U7N0VCGK

The <number> part is unexpected and only present for RPM packages. This part is coming from SLE (SUSE Linux Enterprise) and represents the SLE version used for building the package: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C03U7N0VCGK/p1692787918872219?thread_ts=1692787743.934119&cid=C03U7N0VCGK

This is how revisions look like for the kubeadm package (note 150500 in revision):

[root@80a754535bb6 /]# yum --showduplicates list kubeadm --disableexcludes=kubernetes
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:20 ago on Wed Aug 23 10:48:09 2023.
Available Packages
kubeadm.aarch64                                         1.28.0-150500.1.1                                          kubernetes
kubeadm.ppc64le                                         1.28.0-150500.1.1                                          kubernetes
kubeadm.s390x                                           1.28.0-150500.1.1                                          kubernetes
kubeadm.src                                             1.28.0-150500.1.1                                          kubernetes
kubeadm.x86_64                                          1.28.0-150500.1.1                                          kubernetes

We should consider the following:

  • Should we drop the <number> part from the revision for RPM packages?
  • Should we try to enforce the revision as it is defined in the spec file and not autogenerated by OBS? (this would also affect deb packages)
  • If we decide to change the revision, we should consider what effects that might have on existing packages. We should also consider if we want to do it for existing package/OBS repositories or only for new repositories (e.g. for v1.29 and onwards)

cc @kubernetes/release-engineering for input on this

/priority important-soon

@xmudrii xmudrii added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release. area/release-eng Issues or PRs related to the Release Engineering subproject labels Aug 23, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. label Aug 23, 2023
@xmudrii xmudrii moved this to 🏗️ In Progress in SIG Release - Packaging Aug 23, 2023
@xmudrii
Copy link
Member Author

xmudrii commented Aug 23, 2023

Important note about this is that we don't provide any guarantees regarding revision for packages in the OBS repos. From https://kubernetes.io/blog/2023/08/15/pkgs-k8s-io-introduction/

  • The revision part of the package version (the -00 part in 1.28.0-00) is now autogenerated by the OpenBuildService platform and has a different format. The revision is now in the format of -x.y, e.g. 1.28.0-1.1

@saschagrunert
Copy link
Member

saschagrunert commented Aug 24, 2023

  • Should we drop the <number> part from the revision for RPM packages?

Yes, that does not provide any beneficial information to the end user.

  • Should we try to enforce the revision as it is defined in the spec file and not autogenerated by OBS? (this would also affect deb packages)

I'm wondering why we should do that? In which cases would OBS rebuild the packages and therefore bump the rev?

Edit: Now I see #3220, so we may resolve that point within that issue.

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jan 26, 2024
@xmudrii
Copy link
Member Author

xmudrii commented Jan 28, 2024

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jan 28, 2024
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Apr 27, 2024
@xmudrii
Copy link
Member Author

xmudrii commented May 20, 2024

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label May 20, 2024
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 18, 2024
@xmudrii
Copy link
Member Author

xmudrii commented Aug 19, 2024

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/release-eng Issues or PRs related to the Release Engineering subproject kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release.
Projects
Status: Backlog (prioritized)
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants