Skip to content

runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132

Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom
geliwei:main
Closed

runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom
geliwei:main

Conversation

@geliwei

@geliweigeliwei commented Mar 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.

Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com

@ghostghost added area-Infrastructure-libraries community-contribution Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member labels Mar 3, 2022
@ghost

ghost commented Mar 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.

Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com

Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:

area-Infrastructure-libraries

Milestone:-

@dnfadmin

dnfadmin commented Mar 3, 2022•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.

@bartonjs

bartonjs commented Mar 17, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?

@AaronRobinsonMSFT

AaronRobinsonMSFT commented Mar 20, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/cc @agocke

@richlander

richlander commented Apr 7, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We are currently considering this design proposal.

dotnet/designs#260

I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.

Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?

@ericstjericstj added the needs-author-action An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author. label May 2, 2022
@ericstj

ericstj commented May 2, 2022•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?

@richlander

richlander commented May 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?

@geliwei

geliwei commented May 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?

Hi,
Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.
It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.
I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.
I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:

@ghostghost removed the needs-author-action An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author. label May 13, 2022
@omajid

omajid commented May 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?

@richlander

richlander commented May 15, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This info might be what you are looking for: #50818

We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.

The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.

@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei

geliwei commented Jun 2, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?

I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:
/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]
/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]
/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]
/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-

@geliwei

geliwei commented Jun 2, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?

@geliwei

geliwei commented Jun 2, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?

this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96

@wfurt

wfurt commented Jun 30, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?

As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.
(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)

@richlander

richlander commented Jul 1, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?

@wfurt

wfurt commented Jul 1, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.

Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?

@richlander

richlander commented Jul 1, 2022•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.

  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.

By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".

This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.

linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.

image

Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.

This is a fair analogy, right?

We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.

@agocke

agocke commented Jul 1, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.

@richlander

richlander commented Jul 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.

@richlanderrichlander mentioned this pull request Jul 6, 2022
Open
@danmoseley

danmoseley commented Aug 22, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@aortiz-msft

@ericstj

ericstj commented Oct 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.

@ericstj

ericstj commented Nov 28, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)

@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?

Thanks!
Eric

@carlossanlop

carlossanlop commented Mar 13, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.

Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.

are saying that this PR should not be needed

Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.

do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?

Ping @geliwei to answer this question.

@carlossanlopcarlossanlop added this to the Future milestone Mar 13, 2023
@tmds

tmds commented Mar 14, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

are saying that this PR should not be needed

#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.

As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.

The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.

@agocke

agocke commented Mar 14, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115

@agockeagocke closed this Mar 14, 2023
@tmds

tmds commented Mar 14, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115

I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.

Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?

I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.

I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.

@tmdstmds mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2023
Closed
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects

None yet

Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro by geliwei · Pull Request #66132 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro - #66132
Closed
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Closed
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro#66132
geliwei wants to merge 1 commit into
dotnet:mainfrom 
geliwei:main
Conversation
@geliwei
@geliweigeliwei
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
@ghostghost
added

area-Infrastructure-libraries

community-contribution
Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member
labels
Mar 3, 2022
@ghost
ghost
commented
Mar 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
instead of patching dotnet everytime after

it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for

anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge livy.ge@gmail.com
Author:geliwei
Assignees:-
Labels:
area-Infrastructure-libraries
Milestone:-
@dnfadmin
dnfadmin
commented
Mar 3, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.
@bartonjs
bartonjs
commented
Mar 17, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@richlander is usually involved in the flow for adding new distros to the graph. Rich?
@AaronRobinsonMSFT
AaronRobinsonMSFT
commented
Mar 20, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
/cc @agocke
@richlander
richlander
commented
Apr 7, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
We are currently considering this design proposal.
dotnet/designs#260
I don't think we can reasonably back-port it to .NET 6, however.
Can you share more context? Are you the maintainers for .NET for anolis?
@ericstjericstj
added
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 2, 2022
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
May 2, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@geliwei can you please answer @richlander’s question?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I was thinking more about this (based on our continuing conversations on RID simplification). Is the RID for anolis needed for restoring anolis-specific packages or just to ensure that anolis is correctly treated as either rhel or linux?
Hi,

Yes, I'm the maintainers for Anolis distro.

It's good if the Anolis is treated as rhel.

I wrote these RID maps manually, I remebered there is a way to automatically work out RID graph via build.sh command, but I forgot on which post I found it.

I heard some news that you guys are working on code that could created RID on the fly, is that true ? D:
@ghostghost
removed
the 
needs-author-action
An issue or pull request that requires more info or actions from the author.
label
May 13, 2022
@omajid
omajid
commented
May 13, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
@richlander
richlander
commented
May 15, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This info might be what you are looking for: #50818
We have a maintainers group now. I can add you if you want to join it @geliwei.
The new plan for source-build is documented at https://github.com/dotnet/designs/pull/260/files#diff-20aa11d3c5c8d54fc1c45f4b81927255d3951fdd7cf58589fc6d03a2dd2a6a1bR195.
@geliwei
runtime: add RIDs for anolis distro
9e0e3c5
instead of patching dotnet everytime after
it got updated we plan to add runtime ID for
anolis 7/anolis 8/anolis 9.
Signed-off-by: Livy Ge <livy.ge@gmail.com>
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
Hey @geliwei ! If you don't add the RIDs (manually or otherwise), does the .NET build fail? Can you point us to any build logs that show the failure?
I copy a few errors from http://build.openanolis.cn/kojifiles/work/tasks/7092/297092/build.log:

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-build/self/src/Build.proj]

/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/previously-built-dotnet/sdk/6.0.104/Sdks/Microsoft.NET.Sdk/targets/Microsoft.NET.Sdk.FrameworkReferenceResolution.targets(129,5): error NETSDK1083: The specified RuntimeIdentifier 'anolis.8.6-x64' is not recognized. [/builddir/build/BUILD/dotnet-v6.0.105-SDK/src/runtime/artifacts/source-
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
@geliwei
geliwei
commented
Jun 2, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Author
I have made change to init-distro-rid.sh and also pal.unix.cpp, remove RIDs in runtime.json but keep runtimeGroups.props. But looks like it fails the test again, Would you like to help me figure out why?
this change works so far on dotnet5.0 https://gitee.com/src-anolis-os/dotnet5.0/commit/39c160eb817b5bab7366ed1d14f8c91d4316ca96
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jun 30, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
did we reached conciliation if new bistro is needed @omajid@richlander ?
As minimum we should rebuild other json files besides runtimeGroups.props and include this with the PR.

(dotnet pack from https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Microsoft.NETCore.Platforms/readme.md)
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818. That should be the goto approach for these cases. Is that acceptable?
@wfurt
wfurt
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Ideally, we would not and this RID could be added via source-build per #50818.
Would that mean that RH binaries would be unusable e.g. the RID would work only if distribution has own package created via source-build?
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 1, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Here's my take/understanding on how the system should work.
  • Everyone should publish portable linux binaries (for packages) as a general rule.
  • If they cannot, then they limit the use of their package to specific OSes (probably just one specific OS).
  • Publishing portable + specific is fine. I hope NuGet ignores RIDs it doesn't understand.
By building .NET for a distro as foo, you are not directly affecting package compatibility. You are saying "I'm this and I also accept the things I say I accept".
This is the same thing as blood types, where RIDs are like donors and distros are like recipients.
linux is like O- as a donor. It's universally compatible.
foo is like AB+ as a donor. It's universally incompatible, except with itself.
image
Credit to the Wikipedia page on blood types.
This is a fair analogy, right?
We can take the analogy a bit further. So far, we're only looking at two columns of donors (or RIDs). Let's look at the O+ donor column. That looks pretty close to the unix RID to me. The unix RID applies to Unix-like (or POSIX) OSes (Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD). It doesn't apply to Windows. O+ is more compatible than AB+ but less compatible than O-. That works pretty well. Note that there are other blood types with this same level of compatibility. I could have equally chosen one of the other but chose O+ only because it is more common.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Jul 1, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I agree with @richlander, I think this is the correct direction.
@richlander
richlander
commented
Jul 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@clairernovotny@aortiz-msft It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
@richlanderrichlander
mentioned this pull request
Jul 6, 2022

Open

@danmoseley
danmoseley
commented
Aug 22, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@aortiz-msft
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Oct 3, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @tmds who's been doing some recent work to make source build work without code changes to the RID graph.
@ericstj
ericstj
commented
Nov 28, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
So if I can summarize the state here, @richlander and @agocke are saying that this PR should not be needed due to the changes to how we expect distro's to source build in .NET 7.0. #66132 (comment)
@geliwei do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Thanks!

Eric
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Mar 13, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
It would be good for the NuGet team to review this approach.
Ping @clairernovotny@aortiz-msft to help with this request.
are saying that this PR should not be needed
Ping @richlander@agocke to answer this question.
do you agree, or are you keeping this PR open for a scenario that wasn't covered by that explanation?
Ping @geliwei to answer this question.
@carlossanlopcarlossanlop
added this to the Future milestone
Mar 13, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
are saying that this PR should not be needed
#83246 is superseding dotnet/designs#260 and is still being discussed.
As other rids are still being added, we can add these too.
The graph will be updated as needed for #83246.
@agocke
agocke
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
@agockeagocke
closed this
Mar 14, 2023
@tmds
tmds
commented
Mar 14, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
I'm closing new RID PRs for now, until we can sort out the RID plan, as in #81115
I'm not sure why this doesn't get added, while other rids are still being added.
Will we no longer be adding any rids until the RID plan is sorted out?
I have good hope we'll sort it out for .NET 8, but I had the same hope for .NET 7.
I'd keep business as usual until the plan is decided.
@tmdstmds
mentioned this pull request
Mar 14, 2023

Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@wfurtwfurtAwaiting requested review from wfurt
@rbhandarbhandaAwaiting requested review from rbhanda

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-Infrastructure-librariescommunity-contributionIndicates that the PR has been added by a community member

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Future

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

14 participants

@geliwei@dnfadmin@bartonjs@AaronRobinsonMSFT@richlander@ericstj@omajid@wfurt@agocke@danmoseley@carlossanlop@tmds@jeffhandley@ViktorHofer