20:00:52 #startmeeting Fedora ARM weekly status meeting 20:00:52 Meeting started Wed Jun 19 20:00:52 2013 UTC. The chair is pwhalen. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:00:52 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:00:52 #chair pwhalen jonmasters bconoboy ctyler pbrobinson dgilmore dmarlin masta j_dulaney msalter ahs3 agreene jcapik ddd 20:00:52 Current chairs: agreene ahs3 bconoboy ctyler ddd dgilmore dmarlin j_dulaney jcapik jonmasters masta msalter pbrobinson pwhalen 20:00:58 .fas chris@tylers.info 20:00:59 ctyler: ctyler 'Chris Tyler' 20:01:04 hola 20:01:06 .fas dmarlin 20:01:07 dmarlin: dmarlin 'David A. Marlin' 20:01:13 .fas pwhalen 20:01:14 pwhalen: pwhalen 'Paul Whalen' 20:01:17 .hellomynameis kevin 20:01:23 .fas jcapik 20:01:25 * handsome_pirate waves 20:01:25 nirik: kevin 'Kevin Fenzi' 20:01:25 .fas blc@ 20:01:28 jcapik: jcapik 'Jaromír Cápík' 20:01:31 bconoboy: blc '' 20:02:50 #topic 0) Status of ACTION items from our previous meeting 20:03:04 #link http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-06-05/fedora-meeting-1.2013-06-05-20.00.html 20:03:09 no action items 20:03:11 .fas jonmasters 20:03:11 jonmasters: jcm 'Jon Masters' 20:03:18 #topic 1) Problem packages 20:04:33 anyone? 20:04:38 we had eclipse from our last meeting, looks to be built now 20:04:55 dgilmore mentioned something the other day... mozjs? 20:05:05 bconoboy: i dealt with it 20:05:11 spoke with the maintainer 20:05:23 it's fixed and all blocked builds are complete? 20:05:24 he felt the failing test is bogus so its disabled 20:05:30 bconoboy: yes 20:05:52 cool. So nothing is unbuilt for f19 that are are concerned about? 20:06:03 other one from the last meeting was systemtap 20:06:27 afaik its broken still 20:06:35 #info systemtap-2.3-0.51.ge15a40c.fc20 FTBFS on ARM 20:06:42 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969656 20:06:48 is it all systemtap 2.3? 20:07:40 * pbrobinson is here!!!! 20:07:41 pbrobinson: any failed packages to mention? 20:07:48 systemtap on rawhode 20:07:54 got that 20:07:56 jonmasters: yes 20:07:57 anything else? 20:08:05 eclipse is fixed! WOO! 20:08:36 that systemtap issue looks like something wrong with texlive 20:08:37 nice 20:08:38 and there's nothing else I'm aware of but this week has been close to hell so I've paid less attention that usual 20:08:45 jonmasters: correct 20:09:29 pwhalen: is there a bug on systemtap? 20:09:36 jonmasters, yes 20:09:38 yes 20:09:38 ok 20:09:43 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969656 20:09:51 its in the logs too 20:09:56 thx 20:10:13 moving on? 20:10:17 y 20:10:19 y 20:10:25 #topic 2) Kernel Status Update 20:10:44 * masta is here 20:10:46 sry late 20:10:46 so I think we're not in a bad state on either 3.10 or 3.9 at the moment 20:10:57 I've still awaiting lpae feedback 20:10:58 you might even say we're in a good state 20:11:02 agreed 20:11:03 lpae feedback from who? 20:11:08 I'm even! fuck you brain 20:11:22 bconoboy: Me, likely 20:11:23 masta and 20:11:28 is this lpae on exynos? 20:11:32 Aye 20:11:35 handsome_pirate: who are you? 20:11:40 John Dulaney 20:11:44 ah 20:11:49 aka, the dread pirate roberts 20:11:51 I think that was booting, basic support 20:12:01 booting on chromebook... or arndale? 20:12:08 Chromebook 20:12:13 masta: I think I'm dead.... but I suspect not ;-) 20:12:26 this is 3.10? 20:12:28 * masta admits he has not booted it yet 20:12:28 * handsome_pirate admits to not spending much time on Chromebook of late, been working on QA stuff 20:12:39 bconoboy: both... 20:14:03 hope to solder uart wires to my chromebook someday to help test lpae better 20:14:06 any way that's it for kernel. I think 3.9.x is pretty much good to go and all focus is now on 3.10 20:14:18 #topic 3a) Aarch64 Status Update, problem packages 20:14:45 qt4 is getting some special attention 20:15:09 3.10 isn't in a bad state for current SoC and hopefully we'll start to test wider. The big missing one for both is mvebu and I'm hoping jonmasters has a little bit more bandwidth now summit is done 20:15:21 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/AArch64/Stage4_Problem_Packages 20:15:30 pbrobinson: I do - this weekend I will get a good mvebu update 20:15:38 so I saw the link for the packages that needed to be upstreamed 20:15:45 this week is horrific 20:15:47 aarch64: We've queued up a bunch of f19 updates, about 600 in total 20:15:50 pbrobinson: speaking of which, I'll bring you that mvebu in time for July 6th 20:15:54 * masta will try to find time to try 3.10 on the mira 20:16:02 msalter got gcc to finish in stage4, which has unlocked a bunch of things 20:16:10 (due to gcj being available) 20:16:10 but next week I should have a little bit more bandwidth to help push most of them upstream 20:16:24 jonmasters: cool! 20:16:25 qt and java-devel are the biggest blockers now 20:16:40 Java I'm talking to Linaro about right now 20:17:03 infact most of the remaining stage3 dependencies are due to a lack of them 20:17:41 ghc is waiting on llvm 20:17:45 some of the failues are directly related to the incomplete instructions in the aarch64 bugs 20:17:47 I think we're pretty close to being able to retire stage3 20:17:52 jcapik? 20:17:54 it's unclear if Linaro have Zero on Java 7 20:17:59 I think it might be 8 20:18:03 I'll update 20:18:10 handsome_pirate: there's a new version of ghc landing in rawhide soon 20:18:22 * jonmasters would like to move to Koji with aarch64 soon 20:18:23 bconoboy: in some cases the maintainers simply put autoreconf -vif in the spec file without checking if it does the job 20:18:35 jonmasters: I think it's 8 20:18:48 bconoboy: it seems that all avr-* packages fail to build because of that 20:19:00 pbrobinson: New version doesn't support llvm as backend yet, that's next version 20:19:13 pbrobinson: indeed, Andy Johnson says 8 but I'm trying to find out if that's where it will end or if he can be persuaded on 7 20:19:19 jcapik: first I've heard of avr issues.. 20:19:30 bconoboy: I'm fixing the packages right now 20:19:41 (Andy Johnson is Linaro Java lead, working with their other Java guy Ed Neville and our two Java folks) 20:19:45 there only seem to be 4 20:19:45 bconoboy: and I expect more issues like that 20:20:06 pwhalen: is moving to koji a different topic? 20:20:12 jonmasters: pm btw 20:20:16 next subtopic, we can go to it now 20:20:17 bconoboy: we need to investigate reasons why autoreconf -vif doesn't rewrite the config.* files in some cases 20:20:33 pwhalen: yep, I think so 20:20:36 #topic 3b) Aarch64 - Moving to Koji 20:21:07 2 weeks ago we discussed starting to migrate to koji from arm-temp 20:21:10 dgilmore: any update? 20:22:31 dgilmore? 20:22:35 he may be busy with something else, should we carry on and come back to this? 20:22:40 sure 20:22:40 bconoboy: not even looked at it 20:22:49 bconoboy: no cycles right now for it 20:22:56 dgilmore: when do you think you will? 20:23:08 bconoboy: late july at earliest 20:23:14 another option is us setting up a Koji in HSV 20:23:23 I think we need to wait post f19 release 20:23:24 HSV? 20:23:28 jonmasters: so long as its public 20:23:30 +1 waiting 20:23:33 and I don't think that's a major issue 20:23:42 dgilmore: I can't put stuff in HSV in public, it's all firewalled 20:23:42 Too many eggs in the fire right now 20:23:59 bconoboy: then we cant put a koji there 20:24:09 dgilmore: Can you give somebody else in RH access to the koji hub to do the setup? 20:24:13 bconoboy: we could setup a VM somewhere with enough disk (I know arm-temp doesn't have enough) 20:24:18 bconoboy: so we wait then.... it's only a few weeks 20:24:18 +1, if it's not a public koji it's not a Fedora koji 20:24:33 we can also wait 20:24:40 Post-F19 is not long 20:24:47 exactly 20:24:49 pbrobinson: late july is 6 weeks 20:25:02 We haven't built a single f20 package yet for aarch64. 20:25:09 bconoboy: nirik may have cycles to install the vm and get thing started 20:25:29 bconoboy: no its not 20:25:32 I'm quite concerned about our bootstrap falling behind and having to resolve dependencies 20:25:34 hum? /me reads up 20:25:34 bconoboy: its more like 4 weeks 20:25:50 er, re-resolve dependencies, that is 20:26:06 so, this is adding to the existing hub? or installing a new hub just for this? 20:26:07 Once f19 wraps up there is going to be big f20 churn. 20:26:10 bconoboy: another option is we do for F20 what has been done for F19, pulling packages in manually into arm-temp 20:26:11 nirik: new hub 20:26:12 bconoboy: it's a month to the 19th July and I call that late.... lets not split hairs 20:26:13 nirik: we talked about setting up a vm on the box in phx that arm koji is on 20:26:21 nirik: to build aarch64 while bootstrapping 20:26:29 yeah, we can. What builders? 20:26:45 nirik: 50+ RH virtual machines 20:26:49 ok. 20:26:55 nirik: there is a ton of emulated ones in westford 20:26:57 just need some firewall magic 20:27:00 I can possibly setup the vm, sure. 20:27:12 nirik: only thing needed then is a s390-style proxy setup in Westford 20:27:12 no promises for immediately, but I can add it to my list. 20:27:39 or maybe you can leverage the existing one, I dunno 20:27:46 #action nirik to add an aarch64 koji hub VM on the existing arm koji server 20:27:55 will have to investigate. I don't know how thats seutp currently 20:27:55 It would be good to have it well into building by Flock, we could sprint on problem packages that week 20:28:01 nirik: ok 20:28:26 nirik: we can setup the squid proxy, just need help getting the vm and hub up 20:28:43 (the proxy will live inside rh, not at phx) 20:28:46 bconoboy: ok. I can work on it. I assume a db vm as well right? 20:28:52 * jonmasters hopes there's enough storage for /mnt/koji lying around, but I assume so 20:28:57 nirik: yes 20:29:10 nirik: unless it can all go in one 20:29:12 storage, that' a good question 20:29:23 bconoboy: I think dgilmore had said there was capacity 20:29:29 it's better to have db and hub seperate I think. 20:29:32 ok 20:29:35 I think so, /me checks. 20:29:43 nirik: believe they're on the same vm now for arm32 20:30:02 even though it'll be slow and painful having aarch64.koji.fp.o will be a net-win 20:30:19 bconoboy: nope, 2 seperate ones. on the same virthost. ;) 20:30:20 then when there is hardware it'll be a drop-in 20:30:26 how much /mnt/koji space do you see needing? 20:30:30 nirik: Ah, right- so we're asking for 2 new virt hosts I guess 20:30:41 a few TB? 20:31:02 the virthost has 2ish free... we could also just put it on netapp I guess. 20:31:03 nirik: We're using about 120GB right now... 300-500 should work through the end of the year 20:31:04 for some reason my brain is thinking of 300GB min 20:31:10 jonmasters: doesnt need 1t 20:31:13 ok, thats easy... 20:31:25 dgilmore: ok, so that 300GB number in my head is more realistic? 20:31:42 ok, so 300-500GB then 20:31:59 its only until we get physical build hardware. and move to arm.koji.fp.o 20:32:04 yeah, 500 shouldn't be a problem, could do that on the vmhost even. 20:32:14 nirik: that was my thought 20:32:34 nirik: should we ping you on this next wednesday? 20:32:41 sure. will let me work on ansibleizing koji hub/db config too. :) 20:32:48 sure, I can give an update then... 20:32:53 there ya go, perfect excuse 20:33:03 next? 20:33:13 I have something 20:33:37 so on hardware, there are two things I would like to vaguely mention without too much specifics yet 20:34:03 1). There is a plan taking shape for getting builder hardware. I can't share any more info, but just so folks know we do have this moving 20:34:12 Yay 20:34:43 2). Last week the existence of the Applied Micro X-C1 board became public. There is an arrangement wherein it will ship with a Fedora Remix. We'll get working on that "soon". An update to follow. 20:35:05 that's what I wanted to add 20:35:26 cool, any comments/questions before we move on? 20:35:40 Can I play with one :) 20:35:51 :) 20:35:57 #topic 4a) F19 GA - TC5 testing 20:36:08 #link http://armpkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/stage/19-TC5/Images/armhfp/ 20:36:08 are we there yet? 20:36:40 * handsome_pirate notes that earlier the bug with setting root password was voted a freeze exception 20:36:51 bconoboy: mainline isn't so by definition.... 20:36:57 initial-setup-graphical worked, changes were saved, however the mate image end up at multi-user 20:37:07 what blockers do we have for ARM 20:37:18 as in not mainline blockers but ours 20:37:20 initial setup bug is what I refer to 20:37:31 #info F19 ARM Blocker 20:37:36 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=901850 20:37:55 there should be fixes for both initial-setup bugs 20:38:02 pwhalen: what do you mean by multi-user? 20:38:13 text login 20:38:15 pwhalen: I think the multi-user and gui targetes are setup in a ks %post snip... that is interesting, I'll try to see if the links are right before first boot and then look again after 20:38:56 As far as I know, only one of the initial setup bugs was set as a freeze exception 20:39:01 symlink is right 20:39:05 pwhalen: did default.target get set to multi-user? 20:39:21 * handsome_pirate notes that fixes don't make it into images if they do not go through the blocker bug process 20:39:34 bconoboy, its set to graphical 20:39:42 masta: pwhalen: if initial-setup ran graphically i suspect that lightdm wasnt installed 20:39:53 so initial-setup did the right thing, but the image comes up multi-user? Is that just on the first boot, or on all boots? 20:40:02 bconoboy, all 20:40:07 https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/spin-kickstarts.git/tree/fedora-arm-mate.ks 20:40:10 line 8 20:40:20 how are graphics being tested if the images come up to a tty login prompt? 20:40:59 startx? 20:41:29 .bug 970719 20:41:32 handsome_pirate: Bug 970719 initial-setup-text.service causes endless lvm messages to the console - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970719 20:41:33 bconoboy, this was specifically the mate image, both. previous tc booted to graphical fine 20:41:42 That is the one I refer to above 20:42:28 pwhalen: Okay, so it's a mate issue? 20:42:39 probably 20:42:44 looks like no desktop manager is installed 20:42:47 other issue I have found so far on TC5 is the minimal image does not run initial-setup-text, result is the endless spam seen previously, and fixed in the latest version I believe, needs testing 20:42:55 on the mate image 20:43:11 glad to see folks trying out the mate image 20:43:21 there will likely be a TC6 request tonight 20:43:50 ok so we can try the xfce to poke the bug 20:43:53 dgilmore: thanks 20:44:01 (with the anaconda command line fix?) 20:44:47 I need to update a-b-c to use fedora-compliant boot arguments 20:45:34 jonmasters: ? 20:45:43 bconoboy, thanks 20:45:58 Well, I need to go 20:46:08 * handsome_pirate has a job interview shortly ... with Red Hat 20:46:17 good luck 20:46:26 Thanks 20:46:40 I think the initial-setup bugs should be closed now and will confirm today. the abc and rootfs-resize are nice to have 20:46:46 good luck 20:47:01 has anyone come across anything else not included there? 20:47:51 I'm just wondering if we have an official plan for preparing omap/vexpress images to be more useful out of the box, or easier to deploy anyway. 20:48:26 funny you should ask.. fossjon? 20:48:39 bconoboy: fossjon was working on something for omap, though he seems to be getting distracted by trying to do too much 20:48:54 I've been trying to make an easy to use installer/customizer for special cases like omap 20:49:14 I posted a demo video on youtube to show some example usage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnVSwW8nroo 20:49:17 is this something that places the right MLO and u-boot.img in place? 20:49:45 masta, yes 20:49:46 fossjon: Does it handle omap at this point? 20:49:47 yes masta , it should be able to copy over the mlo first from the uboot folder, sync and then copy the rest of the files over 20:50:04 i haven't implemented the copying code yet but thats the last easy part 20:50:11 ive been mainly working on the interface 20:50:34 someone made mention of the possible use cases which I would need to know, how/when this would be used and where 20:50:59 it actually doesnt matter if the MLO is first or not 20:51:00 ok so the mlo, u-boot.img, and I guess the .dtb needs to be setup too? 20:51:02 dgilmore: Assuming it does what we need, what would you think of adding this script to uboot-tools? 20:51:09 for example, only on x86 boxes to sd cards or on ARM devices them selves onto hdd's, etc... 20:51:15 i think the issue is fragmentation 20:51:27 bconoboy: uboot-tools is the wrong place 20:51:52 bconoboy: there is a package called fedora-arm-installer thats used to setup pi sdcards 20:51:56 it should go there 20:52:08 Is there? Cool. 20:52:14 Can we get a freeze exception for it? 20:52:31 It'd be really nice to have the tool in the f19 base install for x86 20:52:37 er, not base install, but available 20:52:49 thats fossjons package too, sure he can add it 20:52:51 bconoboy: if it's just "available" it can be a launch-day update 20:52:52 yeah dgilmore i made that installer too mainly for the rasp pi images but it could use any image file 20:52:53 bconoboy: probably not 20:53:01 but we wouldwant it in all fedora 20:53:04 s 20:53:16 it doesn't support xz files though 20:53:23 ...yet :-) 20:53:30 :) 20:53:56 Okay, quick recap: 20:54:07 the problem is windows cant read from the ext partitions so i cant copy over the files if its run on windows systems 20:54:17 fossjon is writing a tool that does or will do what is needed for f19 omap/vexpress images 20:54:20 for omap for example 20:54:54 The tool could be added to the fedora-arm-installer package 20:55:22 Assuming we don't want to break freeze, we could still have it as a 0 day update... and in f18 as well, no? 20:56:13 I could try to add it into the installer package as an addon for Fedora usage 20:56:29 as a separate script that could be run 20:57:06 fossjon: for windows we can always share the files separately 20:57:22 fossjon: and let the windows users do the magic manually 20:57:42 yeah its possible 20:58:01 we're coming up on the hour, anything else left to discuss for f19? 20:58:12 test 20:58:23 get the matrixes completed 20:58:58 pointer to the matrix again? 20:59:18 please do! 20:59:32 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_19_ARM_TC5 20:59:59 I've just started, so please assist. 21:00:20 if folks other than pwhalen would help with the desktops that would be good 21:00:55 #topic 5) Open Floor 21:01:03 anything else? 21:01:08 I have one item real quick... 21:01:10 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/qa-machines 21:01:20 I setup some test machines a bit ago. 21:01:36 thanks nirik, I did mean to mention it as well 21:01:47 Access is via the arm-qa fas group. I was thinking of perhaps adding some packager/developer ones too? or just expanding those to also include packagers? 21:02:06 They are all currently running f18, but I can redo some with f19 pretty easy. 21:02:11 #link Accessing ARM hardware for QA: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/qa-machines 21:02:27 so, if anyone wants adjustments or changes in that setup, please let me know. 21:03:10 or thoughts on packager access... different machines? just added there? 21:03:35 thanks for setting that up 21:03:37 #info contact nirik if you would like to see changes made 21:03:49 hopefully it will be of help 21:03:54 nirik: not sure whats best 21:04:12 I think some packager access could help in them fixing bugs... 21:04:20 dunno if that would step on toes of people testing. 21:04:29 yeah 21:04:32 not sure 21:05:31 ok, anything else? 21:05:39 perhaps I will just setup 2 more for packagers. easy enough to do. 21:05:41 nirik: from experience of dealing with it up to now I'm not sure it would make much of a difference 21:05:51 ok. 21:06:05 #endmeeting