Thread: Add AlmaLinux as Specifically Supported Distro
Hi,
My name is Jonathan Wright and I'm in the Infrastructure Team Lead for AlmaLinux. I/we use Postgres (naturally) and today I noticed that AlmaLinux is missing as a specifically listed supported distro at https://www.postgresql.org/download/ and https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/
I see that Rocky was added which is great, but I think it would also be appropriate to add AlmaLinux. Alma and Rocky are on about equal footing in terms of adoption and both are major players in the RHEL rebuild arena at the moment. It would be beneficial for users of both Postgres and Alma to have the support specifically listed.
It looks like some minor adjustments to git.postgresql.org Git - pgweb.git/commit and git.postgresql.org Git - pgweb.git/commit would do the trick!
Please let me know if I can help in any way to facilitate this :)
+Devrim On 1/4/22 10:42 AM, Jonathan Wright wrote: > Hi, > > My name is Jonathan Wright and I'm in the Infrastructure Team Lead for > AlmaLinux. I/we use Postgres (naturally) Glad to hear it! > and today I noticed that > AlmaLinux is missing as a specifically listed supported distro at > https://www.postgresql.org/download/ > <https://www.postgresql.org/download/> and > https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/ > <https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/> > > I see that Rocky was added which is great, but I think it would also be > appropriate to add AlmaLinux. Alma and Rocky are on about equal footing > in terms of adoption and both are major players in the RHEL rebuild > arena at the moment. It would be beneficial for users of both Postgres > and Alma to have the support specifically listed. I defer to Devrim on if the PostgreSQL YUM Repo supports AlmaLinux. I did see some random Internet instructions that shows how to install packages from the PostgreSQL YUM repo onto AlmaLinux systems. For the OS distro, do you have a reference to which PostgreSQL packages are available natively in Alma? I wasn't able to find it in my five minutes of searching (though I did find the repo list)[1]. Thanks, Jonathan [1] https://wiki.almalinux.org/repos/AlmaLinux.html
Attachment
Jonathan Wright <jonathan@almalinux.org> writes: > My name is Jonathan Wright and I'm in the Infrastructure Team Lead for > AlmaLinux. I/we use Postgres (naturally) and today I noticed that > AlmaLinux is missing as a specifically listed supported distro at > https://www.postgresql.org/download/ and > https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/ > I see that Rocky was added which is great, but I think it would also be > appropriate to add AlmaLinux. Well, the reason Rocky is listed is that it *is* considered supported, which is because somebody is running a buildfarm animal under that OS: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=queensnake&br=HEAD I don't see any animal running Alma, so claiming that it's supported seems a bit premature. If you'd like to run such an animal, see directions here: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/register-form.pl It's not terribly resource-consuming, if you set it up to run once a day per branch, which is plenty for a platform that ought-to-work. (There's a separate question of whether Devrim's RPMs will work out-of-the-box on Alma, or whether it'll need its own build.) regards, tom lane
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 10:13 AM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
+Devrim
On 1/4/22 10:42 AM, Jonathan Wright wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My name is Jonathan Wright and I'm in the Infrastructure Team Lead for
> AlmaLinux. I/we use Postgres (naturally)
Glad to hear it!
> and today I noticed that
> AlmaLinux is missing as a specifically listed supported distro at
> https://www.postgresql.org/download/
> <https://www.postgresql.org/download/> and
> https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/
> <https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/>
>
> I see that Rocky was added which is great, but I think it would also be
> appropriate to add AlmaLinux. Alma and Rocky are on about equal footing
> in terms of adoption and both are major players in the RHEL rebuild
> arena at the moment. It would be beneficial for users of both Postgres
> and Alma to have the support specifically listed.
I defer to Devrim on if the PostgreSQL YUM Repo supports AlmaLinux. I
did see some random Internet instructions that shows how to install
packages from the PostgreSQL YUM repo onto AlmaLinux systems.
For the OS distro, do you have a reference to which PostgreSQL packages
are available natively in Alma? I wasn't able to find it in my five
minutes of searching (though I did find the repo list)[1].
Same as upstream/RHEL.
[root@mirror01-ga ~]# dnf module list postgresql
Last metadata expiration check: 1:03:01 ago on Tue Jan 4 10:18:16 2022.
AlmaLinux 8 - AppStream
Name Stream Profiles Summary
postgresql 9.6 client, server [d] PostgreSQL server and client module
postgresql 10 [d] client, server [d] PostgreSQL server and client module
postgresql 12 client, server [d] PostgreSQL server and client module
postgresql 13 client, server [d] PostgreSQL server and client module
Exact packages change based on which module stream is enabled.
[root@mirror01-ga ~]# yum list postgresql*
Last metadata expiration check: 1:05:18 ago on Tue Jan 4 10:18:16 2022.
Available Packages
postgresql.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-contrib.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-docs.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-jdbc.noarch 42.2.3-3.el8_2 appstream
postgresql-jdbc-javadoc.noarch 42.2.3-3.el8_2 appstream
postgresql-odbc.x86_64 10.03.0000-2.el8 appstream
postgresql-odbc-tests.x86_64 10.03.0000-2.el8 appstream
postgresql-plperl.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-plpython3.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-pltcl.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-server.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-server-devel.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-static.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-test.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-test-rpm-macros.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-upgrade.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
postgresql-upgrade-devel.x86_64 10.17-2.module_el8.5.0+2551+8dca950a appstream
Thanks,
Jonathan
[1] https://wiki.almalinux.org/repos/AlmaLinux.html
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat
Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 11:13 -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > I defer to Devrim on if the PostgreSQL YUM Repo supports AlmaLinux. I > did see some random Internet instructions that shows how to install > packages from the PostgreSQL YUM repo onto AlmaLinux systems. I build packages on RHEL 8 and then test on Rocky 8, like I used to test on CentOS 8 in the past. I know that many people want to see Alma Linux as a supported distro, but at some point I had to make a decision which clone should be the "main" supported one -- and that's Rocky Linux. (I'm not going to start a discussion about who are behind two distros, as this won't be a technical one, and also not related to this list). I'm quite sure that packages will work on Alma Linux, but no intention to test the packages on yet-another-clone. -HTH Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 10:35 AM Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 11:13 -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> I defer to Devrim on if the PostgreSQL YUM Repo supports AlmaLinux. I
> did see some random Internet instructions that shows how to install
> packages from the PostgreSQL YUM repo onto AlmaLinux systems.
I build packages on RHEL 8 and then test on Rocky 8, like I used to
test on CentOS 8 in the past. I know that many people want to see Alma
Linux as a supported distro, but at some point I had to make a decision
which clone should be the "main" supported one -- and that's Rocky
Linux.
(I'm not going to start a discussion about who are behind two distros,
as this won't be a technical one, and also not related to this list).
I'm quite sure that packages will work on Alma Linux, but no intention
to test the packages on yet-another-clone.
Makes sense. All of the clones are supposed to be binary compatible so testing across tons of them would be mostly a waste of time.
I'm happy to set up a build node on Alma and add it to the build farm if that helps everyone feel better about listing Alma as well.
-HTH
Regards,
--
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat
Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 10:38 -0600, Jonathan Wright wrote: > I'm happy to set up a build node on Alma and add it to the build farm > if that helps everyone feel better about listing Alma as well. Thanks, but we don't use external instances to build the RPMs for security reasons -- what Tom mentioned was something else. Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
Gotcha. Anything I need to do for listing Alma then (realizing tests/builds won't happen on it directly)? I send patches if needed.
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 11:00 AM Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 10:38 -0600, Jonathan Wright wrote:
> I'm happy to set up a build node on Alma and add it to the build farm
> if that helps everyone feel better about listing Alma as well.
Thanks, but we don't use external instances to build the RPMs for
security reasons -- what Tom mentioned was something else.
Regards,
--
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat
Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 11:01 -0600, Jonathan Wright wrote: > Gotcha. Anything I need to do for listing Alma then (realizing > tests/builds won't happen on it directly)? I send patches if needed. As I explained before, unless community decides otherwise7, Rocky will be listed there. I already buildpackages on 11 separate platforms (plus Rocky for testing), and no intention to add another "clone". Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
On 2022-01-05 04:41, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 11:01 -0600, Jonathan Wright wrote: >> Gotcha. Anything I need to do for listing Alma then (realizing >> tests/builds won't happen on it directly)? I send patches if needed. > > As I explained before, unless community decides otherwise7, Rocky will > be listed there. I already buildpackages on 11 separate platforms (plus > Rocky for testing), and no intention to add another "clone". Are we able to indicate on the download page that our CentOS RPMs "should" work on AlmaLinux, though we haven't tested it ourselves? Seems a bit unfair to completely leave them off the list. + Justin
> On Jan 4, 2022, at 09:49, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: > Are we able to indicate on the download page that our CentOS RPMs "should" > work on AlmaLinux, though we haven't tested it ourselves? I think there would be a concern that if a community package doesn't work on Alma, for whatever reason, we're implying thatwe will provide support in some way. If we qualify it too much, it becomes "Alma exists" rather than useful informationfor the downloader.
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 11:53 AM Christophe Pettus <xof@thebuild.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2022, at 09:49, Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote:
> Are we able to indicate on the download page that our CentOS RPMs "should"
> work on AlmaLinux, though we haven't tested it ourselves?
I think there would be a concern that if a community package doesn't work on Alma, for whatever reason, we're implying that we will provide support in some way. If we qualify it too much, it becomes "Alma exists" rather than useful information for the downloader.
Do you really want to exclude a large portion of the RHEL-clone userbase though? Oracle Linux is listed yet Alma has a much larger user base so I don't really understand the argument here.
It also sounds odd to not want to support someone just because they're running Alma (or some other non-listed RHEL clone like say VZLinux). Since Rocky/Alma/Oracle/etc. are all binary compatible clones of RHEL any bug on one should exist on the others. It would benefit everyone overall to just treat them all the same instead of picking one favorite and in a sense excluding others. Building/testing is one thing but all of the clones that are indeed full clones should be treated the same from a community/support standpoint - for the benefit of users. Almost all other software and open source projects out there have taken this stance, even if they have a primary for building/testing.
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat
Hi, On Wed, 2022-01-05 at 04:49 +1100, Justin Clift wrote: > Are we able to indicate on the download page that our CentOS RPMs > "should" work on AlmaLinux, though we haven't tested it ourselves? > > Seems a bit unfair to completely leave them off the list. I'm not against it as long as "should" word is there. Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
Jonathan Wright <jonathan@almalinux.org> writes: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 11:53 AM Christophe Pettus <xof@thebuild.com> wrote: >> I think there would be a concern that if a community package doesn't work >> on Alma, for whatever reason, we're implying that we will provide support >> in some way. If we qualify it too much, it becomes "Alma exists" rather >> than useful information for the downloader. > Do you really want to exclude a large portion of the RHEL-clone userbase > though? Oracle Linux is listed yet Alma has a much larger user base so I > don't really understand the argument here. I don't know the relative sizes of the user bases, but I think it would be fair to have the download page list only the distro(s) Devrim actually tests on, and then say something like "The RHEL packages should work on other binary-compatible RHEL clone distros, but we don't test that". regards, tom lane
> On Jan 4, 2022, at 10:16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I think it would > be fair to have the download page list only the distro(s) Devrim actually > tests on, and then say something like "The RHEL packages should work on > other binary-compatible RHEL clone distros, but we don't test that". +1.
Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 13:16 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I don't know the relative sizes of the user bases, but I think it > would be fair to have the download page list only the distro(s) > Devrim actually tests on, and then say something like "The RHEL > packages should work on other binary-compatible RHEL clone distros, > but we don't test that". +1 . Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
On 1/4/22 1:22 PM, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 13:16 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I don't know the relative sizes of the user bases, but I think it >> would be fair to have the download page list only the distro(s) >> Devrim actually tests on, and then say something like "The RHEL >> packages should work on other binary-compatible RHEL clone distros, >> but we don't test that". > > +1 . So, I want to back this up a minute. There are two places where the language is being discussed. First, on "Downloads"[1], if you click "Linux", you'll see a few panes, including one that says "Red Hat / Rocky / CentOS". I believe those 3 are amongst those that Devrim explicitly tests the packages against. If there are more, they are encompassed underneath. At this point, I would be -1 changing anything on #1 unless it adds more clarity to how users download. I looked at the data YoY, and clicks to the RHEL download page are up ~100%, which seems to indicate to leave things as is for the moment. Then, there is the RHEL page[2] itself. It's divided into two sections: - PostgreSQL Yum Repository - Included in Distribution IMV, I think it's fair to include Alma Linux in the "included in distribution", though per Tom's point we may want to ensure we have at least one buildfarm animal hitting it. However, we should make it clear what distributions Devrim test against, and perhaps add that disclaimer to the bottom of that list. Or, at the top of the page where we list out distributions, we can add that line below. Thoughts? Thanks, Jonathan [1] https://www.postgresql.org/download/ [2] https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/
Attachment
Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-04 at 13:52 -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/download/ > [2] https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/ (Slightly offtopic, but... )FWIW I *just* committed a few changes to both of these, and made clear that we don't support CentOS 8 anymore. Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz Open Source Solution Architect, Red Hat Certified Engineer Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
Attachment
On 1/4/22 2:03 PM, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > (Slightly offtopic, but... )FWIW I *just* committed a few changes to > both of these, and made clear that we don't support CentOS 8 anymore. (...and I just commented on that change ;) I think it needs to be reverted and we need to agree to how we want to present that point as well). Jonathan
Attachment
Will do! I'll have a registration request come through later today. I'll see if I can get some build VMs on our PPC and ARM nodes as well.
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:09 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
On 2022-Jan-04, Jonathan Wright wrote:
> I'm happy to set up a build node on Alma and add it to the build farm if
> that helps everyone feel better about listing Alma as well.
Please do! https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto
This doesn't produce packages for distribution -- what it does is report
continuously on build and test success or failure. If AlmaLinux
supports more than one hardware architecture, feel free to set up more
than one.
--
Álvaro Herrera
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat
On 1/4/22 2:06 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > On 1/4/22 2:03 PM, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > >> (Slightly offtopic, but... )FWIW I *just* committed a few changes to >> both of these, and made clear that we don't support CentOS 8 anymore. > > (...and I just commented on that change ;) I think it needs to be > reverted and we need to agree to how we want to present that point as > well). (Err, revert my comment to revert. I misread one line in the commit Sorry!) Jonathan
Attachment
AlmaLinux buildfarm server has been up for a while now in case it was any of the holdup here: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=ciconia&br=HEAD
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:09 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
On 2022-Jan-04, Jonathan Wright wrote:
> I'm happy to set up a build node on Alma and add it to the build farm if
> that helps everyone feel better about listing Alma as well.
Please do! https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto
This doesn't produce packages for distribution -- what it does is report
continuously on build and test success or failure. If AlmaLinux
supports more than one hardware architecture, feel free to set up more
than one.
--
Álvaro Herrera
Jonathan Wright
AlmaLinux Foundation
AlmaLinux Foundation
Mattermost: chat