hi.. I am new to Fedora-ppc but I do think that there should be at
least a 13.. Really it is important for us all to have some self
respect and move forward. Although I travel too much but can arrange
a ppc unit (PowerStation) or maybe two to support this effort. I am
a firm believer in integrity and would like to support those who also
have self respect.
Please let me know how I can help. Best wishes to all, Robert.
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 7:00 PM, <fedora-ppc-request(a)lists.infradead.org> wrote:
Send Fedora-ppc mailing list submissions to
fedora-ppc(a)lists.infradead.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
fedora-ppc-request(a)lists.infradead.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
fedora-ppc-owner(a)lists.infradead.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Fedora-ppc digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1 (Dan Hor?k)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:05:04 +0200
From: Dan Hor?k <dan(a)danny.cz>
To: fedora-ppc(a)lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1
Message-ID: <1276031104.2408.47.camel(a)eagle.danny.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
David Woodhouse p??e v ?t 08. 06. 2010 v 13:52 +0100:
> On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 14:09 +0200, Timo Schoeler wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > thus Josh Boyer spake:
> > > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:47:33AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 13:39 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >>> On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 08:17:23PM +0300, Robert Hagan wrote:
> > >>>> As somewhat of a novice at both Fedora and powerpc, does anyone
have
> > >>>> news on when we may expect Fedora13 for powerpc to be
available?
> > >>> There is no ETA for Fedora 13 ppc/ppc64.
> > >> I took a quick look at this. I was _hoping_ that it would be a simple
> > >> case of doing a compose... but there are actually quite a lot of build
> > >> failures.
> > >
> > > Yes, they have grown over the past couple of months. I tried reporting
build
> > > failures in bugzilla with limited success and I don't have time to fix
them
> > > all at the moment.
> > >
> > >> Is there any tool to make sense of these and find the original failure
> > >>from which the others cascade, and to resubmit the dependent failures?
> > >
> > > No. Other than the output from koji-shadow, which isn't really
accessible or
> > > easy to read over.
> > >
> > >> Is there a generic "Fedora secondary arches" mailing list
where such
> > >> things should be discussed?
> > >
> > > secondary(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > >
> > >> Let's pick the gcc-4.4.4-5.fc13 build failure as the first one to
> > >> investigate.... it failed in deps due to not finding
/usr/lib64/libc.so.
> > >>
> > >> Is this because the glibc64 package isn't tagged in
> > >> SHADOWBUILD-dist-f13-build? Perhaps because Jakub never did a build of
> > >> glibc64 for F-13? Can we remedy that?
> > >
> > > This is because koji-shadow is dumb and didn't bring in the glibc64
package.
> > > It will likely work if submitted by hand.
> > >
> > >> Can we get the build repositories rsynced onto bombadil so that we can
> > >> use mock manually there?
> > >
> > > The repos for the tags? Not sure. My bandwidth is the limiting factor
for
> > > most of this and I'm hoping to get new hardware placed into the PXH2
datacenter
> > > in not horribly long.
>
> How much bandwidth does it take to upload the built packages? Surely you
> can't build them faster than you can upload them? :)
>
> How much CPU power do you have there, anyway?
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm interested in this port (as well as I'm interested in a CentOS
> > PowerPC port), but I don't have too much spare time left to be able to
> > do some work here.
> >
> > However, I do have some hardware (both an IBM Power 285 and 275) as well
> > as internet connectivity to give, as long as it is within an acceptable
> > scale (I work for an ISP and have some colo space).
> >
> > So, if I can be of any help hosting stuff on x86 machines, please tell
> > me. I could furthermore set up one of the Power machines, however it'd
> > surely take some time.
>
> The issue is getting the build horsepower and the hosting in the same
> place, I think. I'm not sure if those two boxes would suffice to do the
> work that jwb's cluster is doing... but if so, perhaps we could cope if
> you were to just do a basic install to each of them and connect them.
from my experience in Fedora/s390x most bandwidth is needed for the hub,
the builders (or a group of builders) can use a cache and be in a
different location, it works quite well for us
Dan
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fedora-ppc mailing list
Fedora-ppc(a)lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
End of Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 4
*****************************************
--
Robert J. Hagan
HaganRJ(a)State.gov
Mil: robert.hagan(a)iraq.centcom.mil
DSN: 318-864 0703, COM: +1 240-553-9212
mobile: AsiaCell: +976 07808499797, +1 401 219 1213
GvSMS: +1 502 286 9775
SIPR-only: Robert.Hagan(a)s-iraq.centcom.smil.mil