3 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Jonathan Lebon	8e22075721	RELEASE: Add step to update libdnf's deps ... In the latest release, we should've bumped librepo's requirement. It doesn't use symbol versioning, so we don't automatically get this. At release time at least, we should just peek at the spec we're baking in and pick up from that. Clearly the updated deps are in the buildroot if CI is green, so this should mostly be a matter of bumping to versions which are already shipped in Fedora. See: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/1128 See: https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/pull/2644 See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943773	2021-03-29 10:37:13 -04:00
Jonathan Lebon	271954a41c	app: Add rpm-ostree compose extensions ... This adds support for a new `rpm-ostree compose extensions` command` which takes a treefile, a new extensions YAML file, and an OSTree repo and ref. It performs a depsolve and downloads the extensions to a provided output directory. This is intended to replace cosa's `download-extensions`: https://github.com/coreos/coreos-assembler/blob/master/src/download-extensions The input YAML schema matches the one accepted by that script. Some differences from the script: - We have a guaranteed depsolve match and thus can avoid silly issues we've hit in RHCOS (like downloading the wrong `libprotobuf` for `usbguard` -- rhbz#1889694). - We seamlessly re-use the same repos defined in the treefile, whereas the cosa script uses `reposdir=$dir` which doesn't have the same semantics (repo enablement is in that case purely based on the `enabled` flag in those repos, which may be different than what the rpm-ostree compose ran with). - We perform more sanity-checks against the requested extensions, such as whether the extension is already in the base. - We support no-change detection via a state SHA512 file for better integration in cosa and pipelines. - We support a `match-base-evr` key, which forces the extension to have the same EVR as the one from a base package: this is helpful in the case of extensions which complement a base package, esp. those which may not have strong enough reldeps to enforce matching EVRs by depsolve alone (`kernel-headers` is an example of this). - We don't try to organize the RPMs into separate directories by extension because IMO it's not at the right level. Instead, we should work towards higher-level metadata to represent extensions (see https://github.com/openshift/os/issues/409 which is related to this). Closes: #2055	2021-01-23 17:12:09 +01:00
Timothée Ravier	d71a50796d	docs: Import Release page	2020-10-01 12:01:25 -04:00