On 12/29/2010 03:50 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 12/29/2010 06:47 PM, omalleys@msu.edu wrote:

The plan is to finish 13, do 14, then 15. As I believe some or most of
the bugs if they are getting pushed upstream should be worked out.?
The point I was making was that by the time we report bugs to the 
mainline Fedora, the version of Fedora we are reporting against is 
already EOL-ed, because there is such a huge gap betwen a Fedora release 
becoming available for x86 and the ARM rootfs (not even a complete port) 
being available.

This typically means the bugs immediately get marked as WONTFIX with a 
note saying "check the latest release and raise a new bug against that" 
- which we can't do because we're too far behind in the ARM land.


Fedora 12 is what's currently available, from a previous ARM port effort.  It's not supported anymore.  The ARM SIG is targeting F13 (now bootable: http://paulfedora.wordpress.com/2010/12/15/fedora-13-arm-alpha-root-file-system/) and onward. 

      
There may be a branch at f15 at or around the cortex processors.
Yes, so I hear - the hardfp branch. Having said that, according to some 
benchmarks, even softfp armv7l target yields decent performance 
improvements over armv5tel in some applications, e.g. audio/video codecs 
and databases:

http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=robertcnelson-3173-25135-22766

I kind of wonder why openssl needs krb5. OpenSSH i can see needing krb5
and openssl. And I can see krb5 needing openssl for gssapi...
Beats me.

I'm more than a little surprised that ARM Fedora is so neglected. The
build is very incomplete. This is particularly odd considering that all
the src.rpm packages seem to build just fine.
I was trying to figure this one out too.
I'll get building and see what comes out. Will set up a repository with 
packages that aren't in the main Fedora repository when I have a 
reasonable amount. It'll take a while, though - my main build box is a 
Sheeva Plug! :-O

It would also be really nice if we were to establish a selection of 
proper rpm kernel packages for at least the most common platforms, e.g.:

- Marvell Kirkwood for the Sheeva Plug
- Freescale i.MX515 for the Genesi Efika
- nVidia Tegra 2 for the Toshiba AC100

and no doubt others, too. I mention the above specifically because I own 
these devices and thus intend to have a go at building the suitable 
packages for them. It is after all, a community effort, right? ;)


I think the plan is to eventually get ARM kernels based on the Fedora kernel sources built for many different development boards.  Currently, all effort is focused on getting the F13 package collection built.  Your efforts would certainly be welcome should you try to tackle kernel builds.

I'll also note that the latest F13 koji builds are already available in a repo: http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/repos/dist-f13-build/latest/  That's the repo that was used to generate the F13 rootfs.  As packages are built, this repo should approach the coverage of the primary architectures' repositories.


      
Ubuntu, OTOH, seem to have much better support for ARM. Are there plans
to catch up?
Ubuntu is further because it is really Debian unstable. (although I
think debian is better..)
Sure - but Fedora is "RHEL unstable". I really don't think we have an 
excuse for being this far behind them.

Ubuntu and Debian have been working on this for a much longer time.  The current Fedora effort is only several months old, and builds off of the incomplete F12 package collection.  Further, we only got F13's gcc and glibc working on ARM two months ago, which held up pretty much all progress.  Most of the big problems have been knocked out, and things are indeed progressing.  I don't really understand the pessimism, my perception is that things are going quite well (it's taken under two months to get a working F13 rootfs!)  I don't think that ARM fedora is being neglected at all, it's just a young effort and the results aren't immediately apparent yet.


      

It's not really an issue, there's always a way around it, but I thought
that there should be no circular dependencies in either the binary or
source packages.
Ideally there shouldn't be. :)
Since F13 is just around the corner, I'll revisit the issue as soon as 
the rootfs for that is ready.

Alpha-quality rootfs is available for you to play with: see above.  krb5 can be built without OpenSSL for bootstraping, the option is at the top of the krb5 specfile.  Several packages need to be bootstrapped in a similar fashion: Mono requires mono-devel for instance.

      
Oh, OK. I thought it was the same bugzilla. Doesn't the ARM one feed to
the main one? Why are they even separate?

        
Have you got a URL handy for the Fedora ARM bugzilla?
I'm not sure there is one, or whether it is part of the bugzilla. The
only things I have really found are local to the arm project. I would
rather send an email then fill out a form. lol

I can seem to use my fedora account to login to the arm koji.
Im getting https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/login is handing me
back a
(Error code: ssl_error_handshake_failure_alert)
I was referring to http://bugzilla.redhat.com. Interestingly, there are 
options for target platforms based on ARM. But there are several that 
should arguably be collapsed together because there is only one 
supported target. The list contains:

arm7
arm9
strongarm
xscale

Those should really all be collapsed down to armv5tel for now, since 
that is the only target available. Where do we file bugzilla reports 
against bugzilla? ;)

I guess nobody has addressed this yet; most of the build errors thus far have been fixed over IRC or through the list.  There is, however, a "bugzilla" product in the redhat bugzilla where you can file bugs against the redhat bugzilla.


      
Oh and python twisted is broken at the core level which is needed for
buildbot.
You mean the ARM build of it is broken?

I must admit, I was not really intending to use it. My basic approach 
was going to be to set up a vserver chroot, install all available 
packages into it, download all available src.rpms and:

iterate
	build all src.rpms for packages that haven't been installed yet
	install/update all the packages that have successfully built
end

More packages should build with each iteration until only those that 
don't build cleanly on this platform remain. Those then need 
investigating further, but that's a number of CPU-weeks of building on 
my Sheeva Plug...


Luckily, this is already happening on the ARM koji for F13 and beyond.  There's a status page at  http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/status/  It might be easier to look for build failures there to fix than to duplicate the effort (it's certainly faster).  You could either set up a mock config to build locally, or just install the f13 rootfs.


      
It is probably going to take quite a bit of time to compile. Given
there isn't a compiled version for arm, it will probably take more
work then just a recompile.
Well:

1st attempt:
OOM-ed with only 512MB of RAM (I wanted to avoid swapping onto SD, it's
painful enough without the extra disk I/O it causes).
fwiw, when i did kernel build time testing with the guruplug. I tried
nfs, and a usb/esata drive plugged into either port. nfs with the nosync
option was the fastest (50 minutes) and both esata and usb2 were roughly
the same time at 60 minutes.
Yeah, I can believe that. NFS over GbE with async is pretty quick. Build
performance on the Toshiba AC100 is quite good when I LD_PRELOAD
libeatmydata.so (eats all the fsyncs - I know, I know, at my peril),
even onto a slow SD card or USB stick. I figured that 2x Cortex A9 @
1GHz would build it quicker than 1x Feroceon @ 1.2GHz.
My guess is the 2x cortex will sometimes be quicker then the Feroceon.
:) I would actually like to performance test them. :)
I'd expect the Cortex A8 to outpace the Feroceon. A9 (being 2-4 A8s) 
should easily blow it away.

Performance-wise, I fully intend to do some testing, but getting more 
packages built is a higher priority at the moment.

Then again, with it taking so long, distcc is rapidly becoming tempting.
Since I'm very much meaning to get a lot more involved in this, I'm
pondering cramming a pile of Panda Boards into a 3U chassis I have lying
around.
I wish I had bunch of panda boards lying around, I would probably put
then in a chassis with a switch but I would need fundage lol. I wish the
panda board had usb3 or esata and dual nic gigE's. I would have bought
one of those for sure.
The advantage of Panda is that it is quite cheap and decently specced. 
If you want something fancier, these look really noce, and they come in 
uATX for factor, but they are expensive and only if you want 100+/year:

http://www.compulab.co.il/a510/html/a510-sb-datasheet.htm

There are plans to add some pandaboards to the koji buildfarm as well: http://zenit.senecac.on.ca/wiki/index.php/Fedora_ARM_Secondary_Architecture/ARM_hardware


      
2nd attempt:
Failed because the build process used up all 8GB of space on the SD
card
and died.
Im surprised at this.. it doesn't -seem- like it should be quite that
big.
By my reckoning in terms of how long I think it should take to build (18
hours or so), it was only about half way through by the time it ran out
of disk space. So I expect it to be significantly bigger than this.
That seems to big.. almost like there is a memory issue ie hitting a
4gig limit and starting over or something weird or it is rebuilding it
too many times.
See the other thread. Dan said it can take up to 30GB of disk space. 
Since I've no way of attaching that to my AC100, it's going to have to 
be NFS-backed on the Sheeva. This may take some days...

Maybe set mock up to work off of a USB hard drive on the Sheeva (if you have one laying around?)


      
Considering how much I've had to build from src.rpms (shockingly, I've
not yet found anything that actually failed to build cleanly), I'm
half-tempted to put up a repository of my own when I'm done. Given that
ARM netbooks are becoming more popular I'm sure I won't be the only one
looking for these.
I was hoping the f13 would be released for xmas. :) but it appears like
f12 is going to be around a bit longer..
I am reasonably eagerly awaiting F13, but will that build be any more
complete than the F12 build is? If not, I need to be thinking about a
rack of Sheeva Plugs (or maybe Panda Boards) for building the missing
packages. :)
I think it will be more complete. You can supposedly get an account on
the arm koji, but as mentioned my login did fail. I am assuming the
certificate is wrong for the hostname or it isn't configured correctly
somehow. You can view it by looking at http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/
I just tried it, and it does seem quite thoroughly broken. :(


The web interface seems broken at the moment, but it's still possible to submit builds via the command line using directions at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Package_Maintainers.  I just submitted a scratch build without issue.


      
In all seriousness, though - it seems that ARM netbooks (and servers!)
are very much imminently coming in numbers, and I think there should at
least exist a possibility of a comfortable and complete RH/Fedora
experience.
I'm hoping it can be a good possibility too. I'm cheap. I like the
energy savings. :)
I meant the possibility of comfortably running Fedora instead of Ubuntu. :)

Give it time, F13 and beyond are striving to reach package parity with the primary architectures (as much as is possible anyway.)  The effort is young, but making lots of progress.

Rich