December 2020 - openSUSE Project - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Results of openSUSE ARM Usecases survey
by Lubos Kocman 03 Dec '20

03 Dec '20

Ahoy openSUSE! I'd like to give big thanks to all of you who have participated in the survey, the data is pure gold. I'd also like to give thanks to openSUSE Release team who helped to make this survey happen and those of you who went with me through all of the feedback. Cumulated notes from review during past two days can be found here https://etherpad.opensuse.org/p/ReleaseEngineering-20201202-arm . I have processed the exported survey results and turned it into the following wiki page: https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:15.3/Surveys/ARM_Usecases Data showed us that there is a big ARM userbase that essentially doubled over past 12 months. There seems to be still a lot of ARMv7 devices around, and people on these devices care about Leap. Based on this feedback openSUSE Release team is now looking into ways how to bootstrap openSUSE Leap 15.3 for ARMv7. We don't want to let our users down. We will also look into what we can do about the Rasp Pi 4 issues (sound etc.). We will also see what can be done the multilib libraries. There was a also suggestion to support some newer devices or to provide images with different partition setup (no swap or avoiding separate /boot). Next step is that we will process the notes in a closer loop and will make sure to open features, bugs, poo tickets, contact right people to make sure we can be seen as one of the fine tuned distributions for all of these devices. The optional email contacts we've received as part of the survey will be kept within the openSUSE release team. I hope you we will find a great use for the data. Thank you once again. -- Lubos Kocman, Release Manager openSUSE Leap SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg - Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer

1 0

[opensuse-project] 2020 openSUSE Board Election Candidates.
by Ariez Vachha - openSUSE 02 Dec '20

02 Dec '20

Dear openSUSE members, The list of candidates and their respective profiles for the 2020 openSUSE Board Election are: * Axel Braun - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/docb * Maurizio Galli - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/mauriziogalli * Neal Gompa - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/Pharaoh_Atem * Gertjan Lettink - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/Knurpht * Mark Stopka - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/m4r3k * Nathan Wolf - https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/futureboy Members are encouraged to refer to the candidates profiles at the links above. Candidates, we wish you all good luck! Please remember to updated your details and pictures on your profiles, wikis etc., for the benefit of the members. The election committee will use your profile pictures in the official election poster and materials. Please refer to https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election for details. -- Regards, The Election Committee: election-officials(a)opensuse.org

9 11

[opensuse-project] 2020 Board Elections: my platform
by Maurizio Galli 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Hello fellow Geekos, First of all thank you to the Election committee for the work done. > * Maurizio Galli - > https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/profile/mauriziogalli In addition to my Connect profile, I set up my candidate platform here: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election_2020_platform_m4u9 Cheers, Maurizio -- Maurizio Galli (m4u9) Xfce Team https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Xfce

1 0

[opensuse-project] openSUSE Release Engineering Meeting 01.12.2020 - ARM usecases initial review
by Lubos Kocman 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Ahoy openSUSE let me thank you all for participating in the survey. The amount of responses was enormous (way more than entire Leap 15.2 release retro)! Let me share thoughts from initial review by peoplew ho came up with the survey. We definitely want to do this on release2release basis so we can see trends. There will be two public rounds of survey review tomorrow on jitsi, everybody is welcome to grab coffee/tee and join. More information can be seen in the invitation from Doug https://news.opensuse.org/2020/12/01/opensuse-release-team-to-share-results… All meeting minutes can be found here: https://etherpad.opensuse.org/p/ReleaseEngineering-meeting Participants: dimstar, dirk, lkocman, a_faerber, maxlin, guillaume_g The survey template for the future: https://etherpad.opensuse.org/p/survey-armv7-suggestions Q: Which ARMv6/ARMv7/ARMv8 (aarch64) hardware are you using? The option 'AArch64 based general purpose (e.g. Mustang, ThunderX/X2, Any UEFI AArch64 platform, aarch64-laptops, other) (SQ05)' contains a lot of choices. We need to break it down to the future. UEFI/aarch64 covers a huge - U-Boot implemented UEFI, too. Perhaps other with text field would help. Q: What distributions do you use on your ARMv6/v7/aarch64 Hardware? Ideas: custom image can be misleading as it could be modified Leap 15.1/15.2/TW image or also unlisted item (JeOS). The original idea was a self-built image containing non-standard patches/package- set/configuration. Andreas: mention Kubic next time? (cf. 211 for G01Q06) consider MicroOS, too? Q: How long are you using openSUSE on ARMv6/v7/v8 already? Growth from 36 - 124 over past 4 years Q: In case you selected Leap, what is the reason for that? Andreas: Some comments look like people don't know that we have aarch64 TW images? cf. 151 for G01Q06 Dirk: we need to invest little bit more into getting Leap (on Arm) right. Q: Would you be okay with migrating your existing Leap installation to openSUSE Tumbleweed? we somehow missed ARMv8/AArch64 but that was due to the description which was ARMv6/7 specific. Andreas: perhaps split questions into two. If you run Leap would you consider Leap question yes/no and vice versa (or split by architecture). Q: Please share us with any information you might want to add in addition. We need to do more marketing/blog posts around aarch64 Raspberry Pi (RPi4 in particular) Lubos: perhaps make a blog post with summary of our userbase and summarize current Arm situation in openSUSE project (what's available and what not). * Sound for Raspberry Pi 4 requested, let's make sure that plan is mentioned in the blog post. Not yet tracked by SUSE for backporting to SP3? Dirk: suggests to do a user case specific blog post for raspi-pi4 (e.g. first contact with opensource world, or computer for kids). Perhaps use the trend of RPi 400. Andreas: someone should test the RPi400 if we do the blog post. Andreas: can we do something so that openSUSE is perceived as more fine-tuned for Raspberry Pi? So it's comparable to e.g. raspbian Guillaume: I think this could be video decoding. Andreas: config tool on Raspbian for editing config.txt - consider a YaST Raspberry Pi module similar to raspi-config? Multilib on aarch64: apps like citrix seem to require 32bit libs. Can we ship multilib on Arm? Guillaume: Rasp Pi4 is capable of running both 32/64bit libs, but some Armv8 hardware are 64-bit only and would need ILP32. (zypper does not allow to install armv7 rpm packages on aarch64) - Andreas: note that ILP32 libs would not help Citrix apps, right? G: ILP32 would not help for 32-bit libs and ILP32 is unlikely to reach upstream. Andreas: -32bit packages seen for ilp32 project, do we need to enable this via some setting? (careful: do not confuse AArch32/armv7 and ILP32 here, we'd need aarch32 in a way that doesn't rule out ilp32 in the future). G: Please do not enable ILP32, there is no support upstream! Dirk: 32bit builds are in fact done on ARMv8 (Andreas: and hopefully not picking up Armv8 features) Andreas: While Raspberry Pi 1 is no longer sold, Raspberry Pi 0W still is, as "new" Armv6 device (G: It should remain in production until at least January 2026). Would be interesting to monitor how to Armv6 numbers evolve over time (getting less vs. going up?) Andreas: report of issues with Raspberry Pi firmware in transactional update mode (157) Andreas: report of problems with RPi.GPIO on RPi3/RPi4 (241) ddemaio: Might consider adding a demographic question to the survey to know when best to brief results to community. Something like "What region are you in. [] Asia [] EMEA [] Americas

1 0

[opensuse-project] openSUSE Foundation status + creating the transition team
by Syds Bearda 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Hi all, I've been reading up on the Foundation proposal and i wonder what is the current status? I see a few outstanding issues since August 2020: 1) Discussions with SUSE regarding trademarking; 2) Decision on the legal format of the Foundation; 3) Board is waiting on people to come forward to help in the transition and analysis of legal + financial challenges. 1) Trademarking - Are these talks ongoing at the moment? (also who are having these talks?); - Has a lawyer looked at it already?; - Also what about paying an annual license to SUSE for the use of the openSUSE trademark while naming the Foundation "Geeko Foundation"? As why does the foundation need to be named after the distro's it's supporting? Why not keep it more general? I mean we have loads of different flavours of openSUSE with Leap, Tumblewed, Kubic, MicroOS, etc. Maybe in the future even other distro's will come our way that doe not bear the name openSUSE <xxx>.. 2) Legal Format - I see 3 options; Foundation or e.V. if going with German Law, or a different countries type of foundation (maybe a different EU country..); - Has a Lawyer already drawn up the required documents? 3) Transition team - have some people stepped forward?; - is there already a working group who is having regular meetings with minutes and action-points? Also i would like to step forward to help in the transition team on the financial side. I'm a financial controller with a MSc in Accountancy and I've worked in international environments and with not-for-profit organisations in the past (including helping in setting up a German gGmbH). On a last note I'd like to point out that I'm in favor of having a separate foundation for the project, where the financial and legal side of the project resides. Mainly for donations, sponsorships and the ability to make decisions in the best interest of the community without feeling that we need to listen to one particular group extra. Which does not mean that the two groups can't be mutually beneficent for each other. BR, Syds

3 2