wip: add support for xx-dnf

[panekj]

Fixes #146

Tests are not finished, currently working on getting a Rust/C/C++ software to compile together on amd64 and arm64 with fedora:39 image

Opening for some early feedback/guidance about tests/code quality

[crazy-max]

Some lint issues https://github.com/tonistiigi/xx/actions/runs/7792252979/job/21249899199?pr=147#step:3:275

Also missing DCO: https://github.com/tonistiigi/xx/pull/147/checks?check_run_id=21249896739

Otherwise looks pretty good, thanks!

[crazy-max]

@panekj Do you have time to look at #147 (review) ?

Also looking at #158 (comment), I wonder if it needs some wrapping for yum if that makes sense?

[polarathene]

I wonder if it needs some wrapping for yum if that makes sense?

I think just dnf alone would be good to get in.

Fedora is a nice base image to work with when you want glibc environment with more frequently updated packages, whereas apt I've found to be quite slow lately (at least on Ubuntu, while Debian lags behind quite a bit).

Looking forward to this! 😎

---

EDIT: Oh nevermind just noticed the new commit that I think added the extra support requested?

[crazy-max]

I wonder if it needs some wrapping for yum if that makes sense?

I think just dnf alone would be good to get in.

Fedora is a nice base image to work with when you want glibc environment with more frequently updated packages, whereas apt I've found to be quite slow lately (at least on Ubuntu, while Debian lags behind quite a bit).

Looking forward to this! 😎

EDIT: Oh nevermind just noticed the new commit that I think added the extra support requested?

Yes all good!

[panekj]

Do you have time to look at #147 (review) ?

Sorry this took this long, I've implemented basic support while testing (https://github.com/lapce/lapce/blob/master/extra/linux/docker/fedora/Dockerfile), got slightly fed up with lack of way to test different linux distributions locally and my inner hate for shell scripts and then life stuff happened.

[panekj]

EDIT: Oh nevermind just noticed the new commit that I think added the extra support requested?

Yes all good!

It's not complete, there stuff like

xx/src/xx-verify

Lines 20 to 31 in 46e6c91

	setup() {
	if ! command -v file >/dev/null 2>/dev/null; then
	if command -v apk >/dev/null; then
	apk add --no-cache file >"$1"
	elif command -v apt >/dev/null; then
	apt update && apt install -y file
	else
	echo >&2 "file not installed and no package manager not found"
	exit 1
	fi
	fi
	}

and I have yet to verify if the correct package manager is called for each action

[panekj]

Going through test errors of various distros will take some time, unless there is specific set that will be supported and some unsupported (e.g. would fully supporting xx on CentOS make sense given it's EOL?)

[polarathene]

(e.g. would fully supporting xx on CentOS make sense given it's EOL?)

I would just focus on keeping the support minimal, which makes it more evident what matters to users?

My interest is in Fedora. There isn't much discussion on other distros for the feature, but you could take the stance of only officially supporting a specific set of distros/base images. Users will raise new issues regarding support when it matters then, and test coverage could be expanded at that point?