I''d like to move forward on us getting vanilla builds out for testers.
There are a couple things worth thinking about, which I''d like other
peoples thoughts on.
* The location of the binaries - I think we ended up settling
on putting them on people.fedoraproject.org.
Given the 150MB quota, this probably means...
- no -debuginfo packages. (not a huge deal)
- probably just x86/x86-64 to begin with.
- probably no non-debug variants (ie, same model
as rawhide, with debug ''always on''
- worth doing PAE and non-PAE ? just one? which?
* how/where to building them.
AFAIK, it isn''t possible to pass switches like --with-vanilla
to koji, so the two options are..
- build vanilla as part of the regular build
(not a great idea, it already takes hours to build
a complete set of kernels).
- I kick off a bunch of rpmbuilds locally and push them
by hand. (scriptable at least, so not such a big deal).
I think this is the best option.
* frequency of updates.
I don''t think it''s really worthwhile doing daily builds.
Doing at least one per -rc is probably a good target,
with perhaps a -rcN-git build periodically if the next
-rc is taking a while to land.
* dependancies.
This is the only remaining technical puzzle I think.
I''d like the vanilla rpms to install on FC6, F7, and rawhide.
Doing separate builds per distro is just going to kill me.
The only thing stopping this from working is requires: lines
like ..
%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts >=
%8.11.1-1, mkinitrd >= 6.0.9-7
I''m thinking perhaps something like..
%if ! %{with_vanilla}
%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts >=
%8.11.1-1, mkinitrd >= 6.0.9-7
%else
%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts, mkinitrd
%endif
might do the trick.
However for some cases, those versioned dependancies are there for a reason,
and I''m
not entirely sure what to do about them. I''d rather not have to
build non-kernel packages for the vanilla repo too.
Ideas ?
Ideally I''d like to get to a state where these are built
by a cronjob on my desktop that checks for a new rc,
and uploads new updates whilst I sleep^Wdo something else.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
>>>>> "DJ" == Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> writes:DJ> I think we ended up settling on putting them on DJ> people.fedoraproject.org. Given the 150MB quota, this probably DJ> means... Actually all it means is that you need to ask for more space. - J<
Jason L Tibbitts III (tibbs@math.uh.edu) said:> >>>>> "DJ" == Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> writes: > > DJ> I think we ended up settling on putting them on > DJ> people.fedoraproject.org. Given the 150MB quota, this probably > DJ> means... > > Actually all it means is that you need to ask for more space.Sort of. Adding debuginfo + all arches means that each vanilla build could end up taking up over a gigabyte. There are limits to how much space we can ask for. Bill
On 29.08.2007 21:05, Dave Jones wrote:> I''d like to move forward on us getting vanilla builds out for testers.I''m willing to help here if there is anything I can do.> There are a couple things worth thinking about, which I''d like other > peoples thoughts on. > > * The location of the binaries - I think we ended up settling > on putting them on people.fedoraproject.org.My vote is still to ship them in the proper repos -- an idea lot of people liked in last weeks discussion here. But people feared the space requirements. But that''s a problem on p.f.o as well afaics.> * how/where to building them. > AFAIK, it isn''t possible to pass switches like --with-vanilla > to koji, so the two options are.. > - build vanilla as part of the regular build > (not a great idea, it already takes hours to build > a complete set of kernels).How about a different package kernel-vanilla in CVS that can be build independently of the normal build?> [...] > * dependancies. > This is the only remaining technical puzzle I think. > I''d like the vanilla rpms to install on FC6, F7, and rawhide. > Doing separate builds per distro is just going to kill me.But often needed, as people otherwise often can''t build kernel modules theirselfs, as GCC doesn''t match (it does currently iirc, but often there are different major versions of gcc in the different distros.> [...]CU knurd
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 06:52:41AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 29.08.2007 21:05, Dave Jones wrote: > > I''d like to move forward on us getting vanilla builds out for testers. > > I''m willing to help here if there is anything I can do. > > > There are a couple things worth thinking about, which I''d like other > > peoples thoughts on. > > > > * The location of the binaries - I think we ended up settling > > on putting them on people.fedoraproject.org. > > My vote is still to ship them in the proper repos -- an idea lot of > people liked in last weeks discussion here. But people feared the space > requirements. But that''s a problem on p.f.o as well afaics. Nearly everyone else I''ve talked to about this seems to be against that idea for whatever reasons. > > * how/where to building them. > > AFAIK, it isn''t possible to pass switches like --with-vanilla > > to koji, so the two options are.. > > - build vanilla as part of the regular build > > (not a great idea, it already takes hours to build > > a complete set of kernels). > > How about a different package kernel-vanilla in CVS that can be build > independently of the normal build? This means committing rebases to >1 place, which sounds like losing. It doesn''t really bring any advantages either afaics. > > [...] > > * dependancies. > > This is the only remaining technical puzzle I think. > > I''d like the vanilla rpms to install on FC6, F7, and rawhide. > > Doing separate builds per distro is just going to kill me. > > But often needed, as people otherwise often can''t build kernel modules > theirselfs, as GCC doesn''t match (it does currently iirc, but often > there are different major versions of gcc in the different distros. 3rd party modules for kernel-vanilla brings up an interesting question. For bugs found in kernel-vanilla, I want *everything* to go to linux-kernel or bugzilla.kernel.org. If reports there contain any out-of-tree modules, they''ll get closed out no questions asked. AFAIAC, 3rd party modules are even less supportable on -vanilla than they are on the regular fedora kernel. For the minority that can''t live without 3rd party modules, they can build their own kernels, because building a full set of kernels for each distro is time consuming enough that I only want to do this once. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
On 30.08.2007 07:03, Dave Jones wrote:> On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 06:52:41AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > On 29.08.2007 21:05, Dave Jones wrote: > > > I''d like to move forward on us getting vanilla builds out for testers. > > > > I''m willing to help here if there is anything I can do. > > > > > There are a couple things worth thinking about, which I''d like other > > > peoples thoughts on. > > > > > > * The location of the binaries - I think we ended up settling > > > on putting them on people.fedoraproject.org. > > > > My vote is still to ship them in the proper repos -- an idea lot of > > people liked in last weeks discussion here. But people feared the space > > requirements. But that''s a problem on p.f.o as well afaics. > > Nearly everyone else I''ve talked to about this seems to be > against that idea for whatever reasons.Hallway conversations :-/ I understand that it makes things easier often, but please share what you discussed and especially the outcome (like you did with that sentence above) with the public, so outside contributors don''t feel like second class contributors whos opinion doesn''t count.> > > * how/where to building them. > > > AFAIK, it isn''t possible to pass switches like --with-vanilla > > > to koji, so the two options are.. > > > - build vanilla as part of the regular build > > > (not a great idea, it already takes hours to build > > > a complete set of kernels). > > > > How about a different package kernel-vanilla in CVS that can be build > > independently of the normal build? > > This means committing rebases to >1 place, which sounds like losing. > It doesn''t really bring any advantages either afaics.Yeah, you have a point.> > > [...] > > > * dependancies. > > > This is the only remaining technical puzzle I think. > > > I''d like the vanilla rpms to install on FC6, F7, and rawhide. > > > Doing separate builds per distro is just going to kill me. > > > > But often needed, as people otherwise often can''t build kernel modules > > theirselfs, as GCC doesn''t match (it does currently iirc, but often > > there are different major versions of gcc in the different distros. > > 3rd party modules for kernel-vanilla brings up an interesting question. > For bugs found in kernel-vanilla, I want *everything* to go to > linux-kernel or bugzilla.kernel.org.+1> If reports there contain > any out-of-tree modules, they''ll get closed out no questions asked. > AFAIAC, 3rd party modules are even less supportable on -vanilla > than they are on the regular fedora kernel. > > For the minority that can''t live without 3rd party modules, they > can build their own kernels, because building a full set of kernels > for each distro is time consuming enough that I only want to do > this once.I think you are making your life to easy here. CU knurd
Bill Nottingham wrote:> Jason L Tibbitts III (tibbs@math.uh.edu) said: > >>>>>>> "DJ" == Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> writes: >>>>>>> >> DJ> I think we ended up settling on putting them on >> DJ> people.fedoraproject.org. Given the 150MB quota, this probably >> DJ> means... >> >> Actually all it means is that you need to ask for more space. >> > > Sort of. Adding debuginfo + all arches means that each vanilla > build could end up taking up over a gigabyte. There are limits > to how much space we can ask for. > >We have just to find a sucker to fix the DWARF mess that we have these days... hey, don''t look at me... too closely... :-P - Arnaldo