[opensuse-factory] Leap 32-bit Port
Hello, I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586. I see that rings 0 and 1 are built for i586. Maybe somebody already did that? I've not found anything. It would be great if somebody pointed me. Main main concern about triggering thousand packages rebuild. I see that the buildservice now have i586 buildpower, but it would be great if somebody from buildservice team answered me. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sunday 2016-03-27 20:39, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586.
You should be able to already look this up with for i in $(osc ls openSUSE:Leap:42.1); do osc ls -b "openSUSE:Leap:42.1/$i" -a i586 done and collect the list of packages for which no result is returned. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Many thanks. I will go to try to build _product:openSUSE-cd-mini-i586 then. 2016-03-27 21:49 GMT+03:00 Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>:
On Sunday 2016-03-27 20:39, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586.
You should be able to already look this up with
for i in $(osc ls openSUSE:Leap:42.1); do osc ls -b "openSUSE:Leap:42.1/$i" -a i586 done
and collect the list of packages for which no result is returned.
-- With best regards, Matwey V. Kornilov http://blog.matwey.name xmpp://0x2207@jabber.ru -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
NET-install boots now, but it can't install something due to lack of http repository. http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/matwey:/experimental:/Leap:/... 28.03.2016 12:51, Matwey V. Kornilov пишет:
Many thanks. I will go to try to build _product:openSUSE-cd-mini-i586 then.
2016-03-27 21:49 GMT+03:00 Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>:
On Sunday 2016-03-27 20:39, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586.
You should be able to already look this up with
for i in $(osc ls openSUSE:Leap:42.1); do osc ls -b "openSUSE:Leap:42.1/$i" -a i586 done
and collect the list of packages for which no result is returned.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Now, I am trying to understand how to use https://github.com/openSUSE/package-lists to generate proper DVD5-i586.group 18.04.2016 20:00, Matwey V. Kornilov пишет:
NET-install boots now, but it can't install something due to lack of http repository.
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/matwey:/experimental:/Leap:/...
28.03.2016 12:51, Matwey V. Kornilov пишет:
Many thanks. I will go to try to build _product:openSUSE-cd-mini-i586 then.
2016-03-27 21:49 GMT+03:00 Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>:
On Sunday 2016-03-27 20:39, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586.
You should be able to already look this up with
for i in $(osc ls openSUSE:Leap:42.1); do osc ls -b "openSUSE:Leap:42.1/$i" -a i586 done
and collect the list of packages for which no result is returned.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2016-03-27 at 21:39 +0300, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
Hello,
I would like to try to rebuild openSUSE:Leap:42.1:Rings:2-TestDVD on i586. Mostly for educational purposes and fun as well as to see how many ring2 packages are failed for i586. I see that rings 0 and 1 are built for i586.
If you manage to do it, many of us would like to see it published :-))) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlb5Dc0ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VQpgCfbwQjCwNifDp2Mj9wSKOuUGzK 2QoAn3wBkCT1GVlauaALuF2CWRFz+0EB =eFW2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 2016-03-28 13:02, jdd wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 12:56, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
If you manage to do it, many of us would like to see it published :-)))
for sure :-)
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, 2016-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-03-28 13:02, jdd wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 12:56, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
If you manage to do it, many of us would like to see it published :-)))
for sure :-)
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already).
I understand that Factory does have a 32 bit version, it is LEAP which doesn't. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlb5aiQACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XbRACfUlEGr7kmlasS67XIhsqS61Ml ilkAn1uRZ38zGbGEwqIWv8OVIADvyWgU =BxnL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Monday 2016-03-28 19:30, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On Monday, 2016-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-03-28 13:02, jdd wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 12:56, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
If you manage to do it, many of us would like to see it published :-)))
for sure :-)
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already).
I understand that Factory does have a 32 bit version, it is LEAP which doesn't.
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le 28/03/2016 19:36, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
As I understand, 32 bits Leap is not built to spare some osc power. could it be possible to have a low priority build for it if somebody like the OP want to debug problems? thanks jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-03-28 19:42, jdd wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 19:36, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
But with a SLE core, that doesn't have a 32 bit version.
As I understand, 32 bits Leap is not built to spare some osc power.
No, see above. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On Monday 2016-03-28 19:42, jdd wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 19:36, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
As I understand, 32 bits Leap is not built to spare some osc power.
It was not built because it did not pass OpenQA (I hear firefox crashed), and no one fixed it in time. Needless to say, firefox worked when tried this year. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On pondělí 28. března 2016 19:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-03-28 19:30, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On Monday, 2016-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already).
I understand that Factory does have a 32 bit version, it is LEAP which doesn't.
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
But that's Leap 43 you are talking about, not 42.2, I hope. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 2016-03-29 08:00, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On pondělí 28. března 2016 19:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-03-28 19:30, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On Monday, 2016-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already).
I understand that Factory does have a 32 bit version, it is LEAP which doesn't.
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
But that's Leap 43 you are talking about, not 42.2, I hope.
42.1 has retained SLE's coreutils, and has replaced SLE's libreoffice, for example. Therefore, I expect the following scheme, described by osc commands, to (re-)occur for future releases: * copypac SUSE:SLE-12:SP1/coreutils openSUSE:Leap:42.2 * copypac openSUSE:Factory/libreoffice openSUSE:Leap:42.2 If 42.2 is not to draw from Factory the way 42.1 did, you will be driving the Leap series into the ground, and I would predict that users take "Leap" at face value - and leap away. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On úterý 29. března 2016 8:29 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Tuesday 2016-03-29 08:00, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On pondělí 28. března 2016 19:36 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-03-28 19:30, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On Monday, 2016-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
If you want an i586 release, it'd be better working on openSUSE:Factory than 42.1 (which is a done deal already).
I understand that Factory does have a 32 bit version, it is LEAP which doesn't.
And the next possible Leap release will draw from Factory (and SLE-SP), not 42.1.
But that's Leap 43 you are talking about, not 42.2, I hope.
42.1 has retained SLE's coreutils, and has replaced SLE's libreoffice, for example. Therefore, I expect the following scheme, described by osc commands, to (re-)occur for future releases:
* copypac SUSE:SLE-12:SP1/coreutils openSUSE:Leap:42.2 * copypac openSUSE:Factory/libreoffice openSUSE:Leap:42.2
If 42.2 is not to draw from Factory the way 42.1 did, you will be driving the Leap series into the ground, and I would predict that users take "Leap" at face value - and leap away.
For some packages, this may be the best way to go, but I don't think we should see it as a general rule. For example, I'm most likely going to push Firebird 3.0 into Factory as soon as it's released. But I don't want to see it in any Leap 42.x as that would be the exact opposite of a "long term stable" release Leap is (was?) supposed to be. Users who want FB3 in Leap 42.x can get it from server:database or even from home:mkubecek:firebird30 but those who confine themselves to standard repositories deserve the stability they were promised. They will get 2.5.6 or a tested snapshot from the 2.5 series but they will not have to tackle the 3.0 migration. So while it makes very good sense to pull latest version from Factory for _some_ packages, I don't like the idea of seeing it as a genera rule. I would rather see something like - 42.1 picked SLE12 SP1 package * SLE12 SP2 inherits the SP1 package 42.2 should inherit 42.1 package * SLE12 SP2 has new version 42.2 should pick SLE12 SP2 package - 42.1 picked Factory (or other newer) package * if there is a strong reason for version upgrade (typically leaf desktop packages), pick reliable new version (Factory or other) * by default, preserve 42.1 package and keep updating it If we adopt the "what was picked from Factory should be upgraded to current Factory" algorithm instead, it IMHO kind of beats the very idea of Leap as a long term stable distribution and there would be har to justify calling it "Leap 42" rather than simply 13.3, 14.1 etc. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 2016-03-29 08:55, Michal Kubecek wrote:
But that's Leap 43 you are talking about, not 42.2, I hope.
42.1 has retained SLE's coreutils, and has replaced SLE's libreoffice, for example. Therefore, I expect the following scheme, described by osc commands, to (re-)occur for future releases:
* copypac SUSE:SLE-12:SP1/coreutils openSUSE:Leap:42.2 * copypac openSUSE:Factory/libreoffice openSUSE:Leap:42.2
If 42.2 is not to draw from Factory the way 42.1 did, you will be driving the Leap series into the ground, and I would predict that users take "Leap" at face value - and leap away.
For some packages, this may be the best way to go, but I don't think we should see it as a general rule.
In the context of fixing and reestablishing i586 for 42.2, "some" should be good enough, I think. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
So while it makes very good sense to pull latest version from Factory for _some_ packages, I don't like the idea of seeing it as a genera rule. I would rather see something like
- 42.1 picked SLE12 SP1 package * SLE12 SP2 inherits the SP1 package 42.2 should inherit 42.1 package * SLE12 SP2 has new version 42.2 should pick SLE12 SP2 package - 42.1 picked Factory (or other newer) package * if there is a strong reason for version upgrade (typically leaf desktop packages), pick reliable new version (Factory or other) * by default, preserve 42.1 package and keep updating it
If we adopt the "what was picked from Factory should be upgraded to current Factory" algorithm instead, it IMHO kind of beats the very idea of Leap as a long term stable distribution and there would be har to justify calling it "Leap 42" rather than simply 13.3, 14.1 etc.
+1 - I utterly and wholeheartedly agree with what Michal proposes here (I do hope he is sitting down before he reads this..could be quite unexpected and shocking ;)) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
So while it makes very good sense to pull latest version from Factory for _some_ packages, I don't like the idea of seeing it as a genera rule. I would rather see something like
- 42.1 picked SLE12 SP1 package * SLE12 SP2 inherits the SP1 package 42.2 should inherit 42.1 package * SLE12 SP2 has new version 42.2 should pick SLE12 SP2 package - 42.1 picked Factory (or other newer) package * if there is a strong reason for version upgrade (typically leaf desktop packages), pick reliable new version (Factory or other) * by default, preserve 42.1 package and keep updating it
If we adopt the "what was picked from Factory should be upgraded to current Factory" algorithm instead, it IMHO kind of beats the very idea of Leap as a long term stable distribution and there would be har to justify calling it "Leap 42" rather than simply 13.3, 14.1 etc.
+1 - I utterly and wholeheartedly agree with what Michal proposes here
Yes, by default I'd start with 42.1 plus SP2. We also need to actively push candidate packages from Factory to 42.2 though. Not only ones that are safe and sensible to upgrade but also new ones. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.com/ SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dear listmembers, I just want to mention (again) that providing a minimum set of 32Bit - packages - namely those who are required to build the -32- packages (say wine 32 Bit, glibc 32 Bit) would be a really nice thing to have - the names of the required packages could easily be derived from "baselibs.conf" of each package in question. This would at least help those people (like me) that would love to be able to rebuild a patched version of glibc _after_ the official support from openSUSE has terminated - just mentioning the recent issues with glibc. I could do this for openSUSE 12.3 as the i586 - packages are available - but I am blocked for leap as those packages are not provided. Specially if you consider leap as a long term distribution it would be nice to have all "screwdrivers" mandatory to help oneself - just in case. And those package must readily exist as the -32- packages are being built today - hence some corresponding repository containing exactly what I am asking for is mandatory . Thank you for looking into this, take care Dieter Jurzitza -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (8)
-
Carlos E. R. -
Jan Engelhardt -
jdd -
Jurzitza, Dieter -
Ludwig Nussel -
Matwey V. Kornilov -
Michal Kubecek -
Richard Brown