epel/steering
8
0
Issues 11 Projects Activity

(Slightly) incompatible update for EPEL 8 and 9: p7zip -> 7zip #367

New issue
Open
opened 2026-06-16 21:32:24 +00:00 by salimma · 9 comments
salimma commented 2026-06-16 21:32:24 +00:00
Contributor
Copy link

I just filed https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/UI3SZQWHFQYGQHE4EHKEYAT72WRJEUGD/ proposing to replace p7zip with 7zip in EPEL 8 and 9 (EPEL 10 already ships 7zip and never shipped p7zip)

Accidentally left out EPEL 8 from the initial email, I'll reply with a correction and link this issue

I just filed https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/UI3SZQWHFQYGQHE4EHKEYAT72WRJEUGD/ proposing to replace p7zip with 7zip in EPEL 8 and 9 (EPEL 10 already ships 7zip and never shipped p7zip) Accidentally left out EPEL 8 from the initial email, I'll reply with a correction and link this issue
carlwgeorge commented 2026-06-16 23:12:57 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Seems reasonable at first glance.

Are there any other packages known to be affected? I see a few packages that (build)require p7zip and/or p7zip-plugins. Even if the rawhide versions of these packages built fine with 7zip, the EPEL versions may be older and might not. An impact check in a copr would help check this.

  • playonlinux
  • GraphicsMagick
  • dc3dd
  • lesspipe
  • quilt
  • conky-manager
  • retrace-server

I'll also suggest doing EPEL 9 only first, and then based on those results deciding if it's worth the risk to do the same in EPEL 8.

Seems reasonable at first glance. Are there any other packages known to be affected? I see a few packages that (build)require p7zip and/or p7zip-plugins. Even if the rawhide versions of these packages built fine with 7zip, the EPEL versions may be older and might not. An impact check in a copr would help check this. * playonlinux * GraphicsMagick * dc3dd * lesspipe * quilt * conky-manager * retrace-server I'll also suggest doing EPEL 9 only first, and then based on those results deciding if it's worth the risk to do the same in EPEL 8.
👍 1
salimma commented 2026-06-17 09:37:03 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

That makes perfect sense. I've created https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/salimma/7zip-transition-epel9/

That makes perfect sense. I've created https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/salimma/7zip-transition-epel9/
salimma commented 2026-06-17 12:22:39 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

GraphicsMagick is in a bad state

  • CVEs
  • I suspect it's missing a runtime dep on 7za, having p7zip in the BR helps the compile time check but it might crash at runtime
  • it still uses patchN on epel9 so the SRPM won't even regenerate

So I'm checking the others first, and might just propose updating and cleaning up GM in Rawhide and backporting it to EPEL 9 too.

GraphicsMagick is in a bad state * CVEs * I suspect it's missing a runtime dep on 7za, having p7zip in the BR helps the compile time check but it might crash at runtime * it still uses patchN on epel9 so the SRPM won't even regenerate So I'm checking the others first, and might just propose updating and cleaning up GM in Rawhide and backporting it to EPEL 9 too.
salimma commented 2026-06-17 14:34:28 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

OK, everything builds fine except GraphicsMagick that I'll probably try and fix both in Rawhide and in epel9 - given the CVEs I'd rather fix Fedora as well and fast-forward it to EPEL - there's already an issue open asking to update EPEL 8 and 9 anyway

OK, everything builds fine except GraphicsMagick that I'll probably try and fix both in Rawhide and in epel9 - given the CVEs I'd rather fix Fedora as well and fast-forward it to EPEL - there's already an issue open asking to update EPEL 8 and 9 anyway
salimma commented 2026-06-19 10:21:15 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

GraphicsMagick also built using @carlwgeorge 's suggestion of just grabbing the URL for the SRPM from Koji and uploading that. So we do have a COPR bug in that it can't regenerate a patchN SRPM even for targets like EPEL 9 where that's actually valid, but it should not be a blocker for actual builds in Koji (and anyway is not due to this change)

are we ... good to go?

GraphicsMagick also built using @carlwgeorge 's suggestion of just grabbing the URL for the SRPM from Koji and uploading that. So we do have a COPR bug in that it can't regenerate a patchN SRPM even for targets like EPEL 9 where that's actually valid, but it should not be a blocker for actual builds in Koji (and anyway is not due to this change) are we ... good to go?
salimma commented 2026-06-24 18:21:52 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

@carlwgeorge wrote in #367 (comment):

Seems reasonable at first glance.

Are there any other packages known to be affected? I see a few packages that (build)require p7zip and/or p7zip-plugins. Even if the rawhide versions of these packages built fine with 7zip, the EPEL versions may be older and might not. An impact check in a copr would help check this.

* playonlinux

* GraphicsMagick

* dc3dd

* lesspipe

* quilt

* conky-manager

* retrace-server

I'll also suggest doing EPEL 9 only first, and then based on those results deciding if it's worth the risk to do the same in EPEL 8.

conky-manager and retrace-server don't seem to be branched for epel9

@carlwgeorge wrote in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/epel/steering/issues/367#issuecomment-822266: > Seems reasonable at first glance. > > Are there any other packages known to be affected? I see a few packages that (build)require p7zip and/or p7zip-plugins. Even if the rawhide versions of these packages built fine with 7zip, the EPEL versions may be older and might not. An impact check in a copr would help check this. > > * playonlinux > > * GraphicsMagick > > * dc3dd > > * lesspipe > > * quilt > > * conky-manager > > * retrace-server > > > I'll also suggest doing EPEL 9 only first, and then based on those results deciding if it's worth the risk to do the same in EPEL 8. conky-manager and retrace-server don't seem to be branched for epel9
dherrera commented 2026-06-24 18:38:57 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

As per voted on today's EPEL Steering Committee meeting, this was approved to proceed on epel9 (with appropriate announcements).

epel8 incompat update vote will wait on conky-manager, retrace-server and other epel8 build results.

As per voted on today's EPEL Steering Committee meeting, this was approved to proceed on epel9 (with appropriate announcements). epel8 incompat update vote will wait on conky-manager, retrace-server and other epel8 build results.
salimma commented 2026-07-21 19:55:43 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Should I keep this open for epel8 or should we close and I'll open a new one for that?

Should I keep this open for epel8 or should we close and I'll open a new one for that?
carlwgeorge commented 2026-07-21 23:31:32 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I think it's fine to keep using this one ticket.

I think it's fine to keep using this one ticket.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
overhaul
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels   
blocked
Something needs to happen for this to move forward

  
Closed As
Approved
 Closed with the reason of Approved

  
Closed As
Cant Fix
 Closed with the reason of Cant Fix

  
Closed As
Deferred
 Closed with the reason of Deferred

  
Closed As
Duplicate
 Closed with the reason of Duplicate

  
Closed As
Fixed
 Closed with the reason of Fixed

  
Closed As
Nothing to do
 Closed with the reason of Nothing to do

  
Closed As
Rejected
 Closed with the reason of Rejected

  
Closed As
Unable to fix
 Closed with the reason of Unable to fix

  
Closed As
Won't fix
 Closed with the reason of Won't fix

  
meeting
  
backlog status
needs review
 Work items that have been created or updated but need review, refinement, or approval before they can be considered ready for sprint planning.

Archived

  
backlog status
ready
 Work items that have been reviewed, refined, and are ready to be committed to a sprint. These items have clear requirements and can be worked on immediately when capacity is available.

Archived

  
chore
Work that needs to be done but doesn't add new functionality or fix bugs. Maintenance tasks that keep the system running smoothly and the codebase clean.

Archived

  
documentation
Work focused on creating, updating, or improving documentation for users, developers, or system administrators.

Archived

  
planned
A task that was added to a sprint from the beggining of it.

  
points
01
 A task that is simple, small, and has very little uncertainty. It should be easy enough for any team member to pick up and complete quickly, without a lot of discussion or research.

  
points
02
 This is a task that is slightly more complex or larger than a "1." It might involve two or three simple steps, but the outcome is still very clear and there's little uncertainty.

  
points
03
 Medium-sized task with some noticeable complexity. It might require a bit more thought or collaboration. The steps are well-defined, but it's not a trivial change.

  
points
05
 A significant piece of work. It has more complexity and a higher degree of uncertainty than smaller tasks. It might require some research, a design discussion, or collaboration across multiple teams.

  
points
08
 Complex task with a lot of uncertainty. It's often the largest size that a team will consider for a single sprint. It likely requires a detailed breakdown and multiple team members to complete.

  
points
13
 Any task that feels like it's a "13" or more is considered an Epic. These are too large and uncertain to be worked on in a single sprint and should be broken down.

Archived

  
priority
high
 This is for work that is critical and needs to be addressed in the next sprint. It's often for urgent bugs, important features, or a major piece of technical debt that is blocking other work.

  
priority
low
 This is for work that is good to do but not urgent. It's a candidate for being worked on when there's extra time or when it rises in importance. It can stay in the backlog for a longer period.

  
priority
medium
 This is for important work that should be done soon, but isn't as urgent as a high-priority item. It will likely be considered for the next 1-2 sprints.

  
sprint status
blocked
 Work items that cannot progress due to external dependencies, blockers, or issues that need resolution.

Archived

  
sprint status
done
 Work items that have been completed, reviewed, and integrated. No further work is needed within the current sprint.

Archived

  
sprint status
in progress
 Work items currently being worked on by a team member. Active development, research, or implementation is happening.

Archived

  
sprint status
review
 Work items that are complete but need review, testing, or approval before being marked as done.

Archived

  
sprint status
to do
 Work items that are committed to the sprint but haven't been started yet. These items are ready to be picked up by team members.

Archived

  
technical debt
Work that addresses shortcuts, workarounds, or suboptimal implementations that were done previously to meet deadlines. These items improve code quality, maintainability, or performance without adding new features.

Archived

  
work item
bug
 Issues where the system is not working as intended or designed. Bugs represent deviations from expected behavior.

Archived

  
work item
epic
 Large initiatives that are broken down into multiple smaller work items (user stories, tasks, bugs). Epics represent significant features or projects that span multiple sprints.

  
work item
spike
 Time-boxed research, investigation, or proof-of-concept work to reduce uncertainty or explore solutions. Spikes help inform future development decisions.

Archived

  
work item
task
 Used to break down larger user stories into smaller, manageable implementation pieces. They focus on the specific technical steps needed to deliver the user story's value.

Archived

  
work item
user story
 User-facing features or functionality that can be framed from a user perspective, describing what someone wants to accomplish and why.

Archived

No labels
blocked
Closed As
Approved
Closed As
Cant Fix
Closed As
Deferred
Closed As
Duplicate
Closed As
Fixed
Closed As
Nothing to do
Closed As
Rejected
Closed As
Unable to fix
Closed As
Won't fix
meeting
backlog status
needs review
backlog status
ready
chore
documentation
planned
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
priority
high
priority
low
priority
medium
sprint status
blocked
sprint status
done
sprint status
in progress
sprint status
review
sprint status
to do
technical debt
work item
bug
work item
epic
work item
spike
work item
task
work item
user story
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
epel/steering#367
No description provided.