From Fedora Project Wiki
No edit summary
(Deferred to F38 by FESCo)
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
= Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib <!-- The name of your change proposal --> =
= Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib <!-- The name of your change proposal --> =


{{Change_Proposal_Banner}}


== Summary ==
== Summary ==
Line 11: Line 10:
This first step will move, one by one, individual JDKs in F37 to be built `--with-stdc++lib=static` and against in-tree (bundeld) libraries:  `--with-zlib="bundled"  --with-freetype="bundled"  --with-libjpeg="bundled"  --with-giflib="bundled"  --withlibpng="bundled"  --with-lcms="bundled"  --with-harfbuzz="bundled" `
This first step will move, one by one, individual JDKs in F37 to be built `--with-stdc++lib=static` and against in-tree (bundeld) libraries:  `--with-zlib="bundled"  --with-freetype="bundled"  --with-libjpeg="bundled"  --with-giflib="bundled"  --withlibpng="bundled"  --with-lcms="bundled"  --with-harfbuzz="bundled" `


We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. I'm not sure if this is
We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. Still I'm not sure if this testing can ever be enough, considering all the use-cases we do not know.
 
== non goal ==
It is not goal to embed any security libraries. JDK is using several security providers, and all are currently loaded dynamically in runtime. Still  there is remaining issue with cacerts: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#cacerts


== Owner ==
== Owner ==
Line 26: Line 28:


== Current status ==
== Current status ==
[[Category:ChangePageIncomplete]]
[[Category:ChangeAcceptedF38]]
<!-- When your change proposal page is completed and ready for review and announcement -->
<!-- When your change proposal page is completed and ready for review and announcement -->
<!-- remove Category:ChangePageIncomplete and change it to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler -->
<!-- remove Category:ChangePageIncomplete and change it to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler -->
Line 36: Line 38:
[[Category:SystemWideChange]]
[[Category:SystemWideChange]]
* System or Self contained change?  By the changes done, this is '''Self Contianed Change'''. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more ''System Wide Change''.
* System or Self contained change?  By the changes done, this is '''Self Contianed Change'''. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more ''System Wide Change''.
* Targeted release: [[Releases/37 | Fedora Linux 37 ]]  
* Targeted release: [[Releases/38 | Fedora Linux 38 ]]  
* Last updated: <!-- this is an automatic macro — you don't need to change this line -->  {{REVISIONYEAR}}-{{REVISIONMONTH}}-{{REVISIONDAY2}}  
* Last updated: <!-- this is an automatic macro — you don't need to change this line -->  {{REVISIONYEAR}}-{{REVISIONMONTH}}-{{REVISIONDAY2}}  
<!-- After the change proposal is accepted by FESCo, tracking bug is created in Bugzilla and linked to this page  
<!-- After the change proposal is accepted by FESCo, tracking bug is created in Bugzilla and linked to this page  
Line 44: Line 46:
ON_QA -> change is fully code complete
ON_QA -> change is fully code complete
-->
-->
* FESCo issue: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
* [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/ devel thread]
* Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
* FESCo issue: [https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2794 #2794]
* Release notes tracker: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
* Tracker bug: [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2097516 #2097516]
* Release notes tracker: [https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/release-notes/issue/848 #848]


== Detailed Description ==
== Detailed Description ==
Line 53: Line 56:


Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details  in the main page then here.
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details  in the main page then here.
See very valuable thread about the topic: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/


== Feedback ==
== Feedback ==
Line 96: Line 101:


== Scope ==
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners: push improved version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-latest-openjdk/pull-request/98#request_diff to all JDKs - one by one from latest, over 17 to 11 and 8. Once settled down in F37 the backport to F36 is expected.  
* Proposal owners: push improved version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-latest-openjdk/pull-request/98#request_diff to all JDKs - one freby one from latest, over 17 to 11 and 8. Once settled down in F37 the backport to F36 is expected.  
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->


Line 102: Line 107:
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->


* Release engineering: N/A[https://pagure.io/releng/issues #Releng issue number] <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10798 #10798] <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)?  Is a mass rebuild required?  include a link to the releng issue.  
<!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)?  Is a mass rebuild required?  include a link to the releng issue.  
The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication -->
The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication -->
Line 119: Line 124:


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
The compatibility and upgrade path should remain completely smooth.




Line 137: Line 143:


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
Install system JDK (java-17-openjdk) and ru your favorite application or development. No regression should be noted.




== User Experience ==
== User Experience ==
Because of in-tree  libraries, minimal image or font rendering differences canbe spotted after very detailed investigations - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Side_effects - still, no of th e https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Known_issues should be hit by this proposal.
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result?
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result?


Line 153: Line 163:
== Dependencies ==
== Dependencies ==
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package?  Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends?  In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate?  Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? -->
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package?  Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends?  In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate?  Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? -->
No dependent packages should notice the change.


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
Line 158: Line 169:


== Contingency Plan ==
== Contingency Plan ==
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan?  This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration".  Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages).  If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy.  -->
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan?  This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration".  Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages).  If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy.  -->
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) N/A (not a System Wide Change)  <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Contingency mechanism: Revert the patches and rework https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs
<!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place?  This will typically be the beta freeze. -->
<!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place?  This will typically be the beta freeze. -->
* Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)  <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Contingency deadline: before f37 Beta freeze
<!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? -->
<!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? -->
* Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change), Yes/No <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Blocks release? Unless the java-stack will become completely borked then no.
 


== Documentation ==
== Documentation ==
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this change, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs
 
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
N/A (not a System Wide Change)


== Release Notes ==
== Release Notes ==

Latest revision as of 16:40, 7 September 2022


Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree libraries and with static stdc++lib

Summary

This is initial step to move JDKs to be more like other JDKs, to build proper transferable images, and to lower certification burden of each binary. Long storyshort, first step in: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs

This first step will move, one by one, individual JDKs in F37 to be built --with-stdc++lib=static and against in-tree (bundeld) libraries: --with-zlib="bundled" --with-freetype="bundled" --with-libjpeg="bundled" --with-giflib="bundled" --withlibpng="bundled" --with-lcms="bundled" --with-harfbuzz="bundled"

We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not face negative experience. Still I'm not sure if this testing can ever be enough, considering all the use-cases we do not know.

non goal

It is not goal to embed any security libraries. JDK is using several security providers, and all are currently loaded dynamically in runtime. Still there is remaining issue with cacerts: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#cacerts

Owner

Current status

  • System or Self contained change? By the changes done, this is Self Contianed Change. However from view of impact, and possible world notification, it is more System Wide Change.
  • Targeted release: Fedora Linux 38
  • Last updated: 2022-09-07
  • devel thread
  • FESCo issue: #2794
  • Tracker bug: #2097516
  • Release notes tracker: #848

Detailed Description

Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs for whole picture

Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_JDKs_in_RPMs_to_become_portable for this particular step. I would rather keep the details in the main page then here.

See very valuable thread about the topic: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IR5C3YVVABP6LVCXQL3UY5VZPSYWDAF5/

Feedback

According to short investigations, there are already precedents, where certification is a reason to build once, certificate, and repack.

According to developers, the non-portbale JDK is causing upredicted behavior different from other JDK vendors

According to JDK packagers and testers, there is to much JDKs now, and the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Move_Fedora_JDKs_to_become_single-built.2C_portable.2C_ordinary_JDKs.2C_while_keeping_comfortable.2C_usual_system_integration is the only way out

Benefit to Fedora

Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Motivation for whole picture.

This particualr proposal's main benefit will be that Fedora's JDKs as packed in RPMs will again start to resemble upstream JDKs and other vendors build, and some platfrom specific issues disappear, while JDKs remain same in view of system integration and user expereince

Scope

  • Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
  • Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
  • Alignment with Objectives:

Upgrade/compatibility impact

The compatibility and upgrade path should remain completely smooth.


How To Test

Install system JDK (java-17-openjdk) and ru your favorite application or development. No regression should be noted.


User Experience

Because of in-tree libraries, minimal image or font rendering differences canbe spotted after very detailed investigations - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Side_effects - still, no of th e https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs#Known_issues should be hit by this proposal.


Dependencies

No dependent packages should notice the change.


Contingency Plan

Documentation

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs

Release Notes