Remove arch and zfs version dependency

[gordan-bobic]

Remove arch and zfs version dependency

Signed-off-by: Gordan Bobic gordan@redsleeve.org

Motivation and Context

zfs-dracut is automatically built for whatever architecture zfs is being compiled for. This is incorrect since zfs-dracut only contains bash scripts and is thus compatible with any arch.

Additionally, version dependency is unnecessary since this only requires a set of functionality basic enough to import the rootfs. For example, zfs-dracut 0.7.x works absolutely fine for creating bootable initramfs using zfs 0.8.x binaries.

It doesn't fix this issue, but it does help produce a zfs-dracut rpm that can be installed without errors and overrides when combating a regression situation:
#8913

Description

It's a relatively trivial change - it makes zfs-dracut build as a noarch package since it only contains bash scripts. It also removes the package's dependency on zfs of a particular arch and version since the functionality it needs is minimal.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #8914 into master will increase coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8914      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.66%   78.75%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         382      382              
  Lines      117840   117840              
==========================================
+ Hits        92698    92804     +106     
+ Misses      25142    25036     -106

Flag	Coverage Δ
#kernel	79.28% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
#user	67.23% <ø> (+0.17%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c1b5801...4248f99. Read the comment docs.

[tonyhutter]

1. You have a good write-up of the motivation behind this PR. Can you include that text in your commit message? Also, can you add a Signed-off-by line?

Additionally, version dependency is unnecessary since this only requires a set of functionality basic
enough to import the rootfs. For example, zfs-dracut 0.7.x works absolutely fine for creating bootable
initramfs using zfs 0.8.x binaries.

Unfortunately, I think it does need to be dependent on the zfs version, as the modules in
contrib/dracut/90zfs/module-setup.sh.in may change. For example an 0.7.x zfs-dracut is not going to load the 0.8.x icp.ko module.

[gordan-bobic]

Apologies if this is a n00b question, is "signed-off" supposed to be by me or a reviewer?

Interesting, I hadn't expected 0.7.x to infer icp.ko dependency but 0.8.x to have it explicitly listed. Is there a reason why this has become explicit in 0.8.x?

I have re-added the version dependency without the release/arch parts.

[tonyhutter]

Signed-off-by is for you (the author). The reviewers will automatically be tagged with a Reviewed-by line:

    Fix typo in vdev_raidz_math.c
    
    Reviewed by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
    Reviewed-by: George Melikov <mail@gmelikov.ru>
    Signed-off-by: Brad Forschinger <github@bnjf.id.au>
    Closes #8875
    Closes #8880

Interesting, I hadn't expected 0.7.x to infer icp.ko dependency but 0.8.x to have it explicitly listed. Is
there a reason why this has become explicit in 0.8.x?

It's because 0.8.0 officially supported encryption (icp.ko), and channel programs (zlua.ko). Also, I see that the 0.8.x module-setup.sh.in includes spl.ko, which is wrong, since it was removed in 0.8.0. I assume that will be removed soon.

[tonyhutter]

Also, I see that the 0.8.x module-setup.sh.in includes spl.ko, which is wrong, since it was removed
in 0.8.0. I assume that will be removed soon.

Oops, disregard this! spl.ko was moved into the zfs repo for 0.8.x; it was not removed. It still needs to be inmodule-setup.sh.in

[tonyhutter]

I think you need:

 Requires:       %{name} >= %{version}-%{release}

Also, can you squash these commits, and add a commit message and a Signed-off-by line to the actual commit (via git commit --amend)?

[gordan-bobic]

I don't think -%{release} is required as it seems highly improbable that a feature will be patched in in a build time package patch.

Commit message modified. I don't have squash permissions on this side.

[behlendorf]

@gordan-bobic I agree, the %{release} is needed. But the version seems like a good idea to ensure any expected features exist. I can squash then when merging if you like. You can do it locally as well but you'll need to force update the PR.

[gordan-bobic]

Squashed from my side and added release version into version dependency.

[behlendorf]

@gordan-bobic thanks, and I'm sorry. I badly typo'd above. I meant to say "I agree, the %{release} is not needed.". Can you update it one last time!

[gordan-bobic]

No problem, @behlendorf, pushed.