Hi everyone.
Just wanted to give you all a brief heads up that Fedora on PPC as a secondary arch is still alive and kicking and no dead horse!
On a more serious note, we've recently been catching up to the current Fedora 15 packages after PowerPC moved to secondary arch status after Fedora 12. This took a while, but thanks to pretty powerful builders and concentrated effort from the PowerPC team we've gotten pretty close to catching up by now.
The current focus is to get the installer to work properly again. With the switch to Lorax, the new unified initrd and other changes we hit a few problems recently, but at least we've had a successful install with the latest mash trees on a Power7 machine recently via DVD [1].
Discussions are still ongoing on how to solve the unified initrd size problem though as currently for Power6 or Power5 the new initrd is just too large to ever work, even if it would be better compressed. So we might have to go back to a 2 stage install process for PowerPC at least, but very likely with a dracut based 1st stage then.
Due to these installer problems we're probably not going to be able to have an official PowerPC release for Fedora 15, but the goal is to definitely get it done for Fedora 16.
Thanks to everyone working on getting PowerPC in Fedora back into shape!
For more information, feel free to visit the Fedora PowerPC wiki:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/PowerPC
Thanks & regards, Phil
[1] http://ppc.koji.fedoraproject.org/mnt/koji/scratch/karsten/iso/
Dear Phil,
In message 4DB96859.3070700@redhat.com you wrote:
Just wanted to give you all a brief heads up that Fedora on PPC as a secondary arch is still alive and kicking and no dead horse!
Thanks a lot for the update.
Due to these installer problems we're probably not going to be able to have an official PowerPC release for Fedora 15, but the goal is to definitely get it done for Fedora 16.
Am I interpreting this right that this effctively means we will have to run a new installation on PPC machines currently runninc F12?
I guess the chances that a yum based update from F12 to F16 are negligible?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 15:31 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Due to these installer problems we're probably not going to be able to have an official PowerPC release for Fedora 15, but the goal is to definitely get it done for Fedora 16.
Am I interpreting this right that this effctively means we will have to run a new installation on PPC machines currently runninc F12?
Well, if you want to do a yum update, you don't *need* the installer initrd to work :)
There's no real reason you shouldn't be able to update to the F15 packages even without an installer, surely?
Dear David Woodhouse,
In message 1303997568.2912.117.camel@macbook.infradead.org you wrote:
There's no real reason you shouldn't be able to update to the F15 packages even without an installer, surely?
Did you try it? And did it work? Normally yum will refuse to update when you try skipping more than a single version.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 15:47 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Did you try it? And did it work? Normally yum will refuse to update when you try skipping more than a single version.
Define 'refuse'. It doesn't even *know*, generally.
I *often* update by two releases at a time. Sometimes more.
2011/4/28 Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de:
Dear David Woodhouse,
In message 1303997568.2912.117.camel@macbook.infradead.org you wrote:
There's no real reason you shouldn't be able to update to the F15 packages even without an installer, surely?
Did you try it? And did it work? Normally yum will refuse to update when you try skipping more than a single version.
I tried - it almost works (you need to turn selinux into a permissive mode before upgrade and it will require relabeling before turning it on again).
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Phil Knirsch pknirsch@redhat.com wrote:
Hi everyone.
Just wanted to give you all a brief heads up that Fedora on PPC as a secondary arch is still alive and kicking and no dead horse!
On a more serious note, we've recently been catching up to the current Fedora 15 packages after PowerPC moved to secondary arch status after Fedora 12. This took a while, but thanks to pretty powerful builders and concentrated effort from the PowerPC team we've gotten pretty close to catching up by now.
The current focus is to get the installer to work properly again. With the switch to Lorax, the new unified initrd and other changes we hit a few problems recently, but at least we've had a successful install with the latest mash trees on a Power7 machine recently via DVD [1].
Discussions are still ongoing on how to solve the unified initrd size problem though as currently for Power6 or Power5 the new initrd is just too large to ever work, even if it would be better compressed. So we might have to go back to a 2 stage install process for PowerPC at least, but very likely with a dracut based 1st stage then.
As noted on IRC, the DVD doesn't support ppc32 machines. Are those being dropped, or is it simply a temporary omission?
On a similar note, it seems the preference for packages is now ppc64 whereas in prior Fedora releases ppc was the perferred arch, even on 64-bit machines. RHEL 6 (and SLES 11) have made that changed, but it was rejected by FESCo prior to PowerPC being dropped as a primary architecture. Has the preference changed to 64-bit permanently?
josh
Josh Boyer píše v Čt 28. 04. 2011 v 13:20 -0400:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Phil Knirsch pknirsch@redhat.com wrote:
Hi everyone.
Just wanted to give you all a brief heads up that Fedora on PPC as a secondary arch is still alive and kicking and no dead horse!
On a more serious note, we've recently been catching up to the current Fedora 15 packages after PowerPC moved to secondary arch status after Fedora 12. This took a while, but thanks to pretty powerful builders and concentrated effort from the PowerPC team we've gotten pretty close to catching up by now.
The current focus is to get the installer to work properly again. With the switch to Lorax, the new unified initrd and other changes we hit a few problems recently, but at least we've had a successful install with the latest mash trees on a Power7 machine recently via DVD [1].
Discussions are still ongoing on how to solve the unified initrd size problem though as currently for Power6 or Power5 the new initrd is just too large to ever work, even if it would be better compressed. So we might have to go back to a 2 stage install process for PowerPC at least, but very likely with a dracut based 1st stage then.
As noted on IRC, the DVD doesn't support ppc32 machines. Are those being dropped, or is it simply a temporary omission?
On a similar note, it seems the preference for packages is now ppc64 whereas in prior Fedora releases ppc was the perferred arch, even on 64-bit machines. RHEL 6 (and SLES 11) have made that changed, but it was rejected by FESCo prior to PowerPC being dropped as a primary architecture. Has the preference changed to 64-bit permanently?
we can decide it ourselves now, so I'd go with 2 branches - ppc (32-bit) to satisfy people with eg. Mac G4 hardware and ppc64 (with 64-bit as preferred and 32-bit as compat, it's a known fact that Fedora serves as RHEL upstream) for G5s and IBM servers/workstations.
Dan
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Dan Horák dan@danny.cz wrote:
Discussions are still ongoing on how to solve the unified initrd size problem though as currently for Power6 or Power5 the new initrd is just too large to ever work, even if it would be better compressed. So we might have to go back to a 2 stage install process for PowerPC at least, but very likely with a dracut based 1st stage then.
As noted on IRC, the DVD doesn't support ppc32 machines. Are those being dropped, or is it simply a temporary omission?
On a similar note, it seems the preference for packages is now ppc64 whereas in prior Fedora releases ppc was the perferred arch, even on 64-bit machines. RHEL 6 (and SLES 11) have made that changed, but it was rejected by FESCo prior to PowerPC being dropped as a primary architecture. Has the preference changed to 64-bit permanently?
we can decide it ourselves now, so I'd go with 2 branches - ppc (32-bit) to satisfy people with eg. Mac G4 hardware and ppc64 (with 64-bit as preferred and 32-bit as compat, it's a known fact that Fedora serves as RHEL upstream) for G5s and IBM servers/workstations.
I think it would be beneficial to spend a bit of time documenting the supported hardware and composition going forward. I have no personal preference on the bit-size issue, but it wasn't communicated on the list prior to my asking.
Additional items to cover are:
1) Are ppc32 machines supported? Specifically I'm thinking of Apple G4 machines, but we used to build a bunch of Freescale device drivers and such as well for machines in the 6xx class.
2) Which machine type are supported? Seems POWER7, possibly POWER6 and 5. I would imagine we would want to explicitly drop PS3 support given it's limited memory (vs initrd) and the fact that it's not really sustainable as a machine due to firmware changes. However, do we support Apple G5 and Powerstation machines? (I think yes, but it's unclear).
3) Which arch is the primary on 64-bit (seems ppc64)
josh
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 13:36 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Additional items to cover are:
- Are ppc32 machines supported? Specifically I'm thinking of Apple
G4 machines, but we used to build a bunch of Freescale device drivers and such as well for machines in the 6xx class.
We should definitely continue to support ppc32 machines. There are a *lot* of embedded ppc32 machines around.
- Which machine type are supported? Seems POWER7, possibly POWER6
and 5. I would imagine we would want to explicitly drop PS3 support given it's limited memory (vs initrd) and the fact that it's not really sustainable as a machine due to firmware changes. However, do we support Apple G5 and Powerstation machines? (I think yes, but it's unclear).
I think we should, yes. These things aren't that hard to support.
We should try to avoid *actively* dropping things that used to work.
- Which arch is the primary on 64-bit (seems ppc64)
Ick, I really don't like that decision. The 32-bit userspace is *so* much better tested, and isn't register-starved like certain other architectures in 32-bit mode, so the major benefit of 64-bit mode just isn't there.
But I suppose given that IBM have driven it through for RHEL and SLES, 64-bit userspace will be getting somewhat more testing.
What packages still *don't* build in the 64-bit versions, and would be missing (or bizarrely 32-bit-only) if we have 64-bit as the primary arch on ppc64?
We were typically just not caring about the PPC64 ExcludeArch tracker bug, although I have a distinct recollection of getting drunk in a Shanghai hotel room at one point and doing OCaml support. Is that still in the Fedora packages?
Am 28.04.2011 20:24, schrieb David Woodhouse:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 13:36 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Additional items to cover are:
- Are ppc32 machines supported? Specifically I'm thinking of Apple
G4 machines, but we used to build a bunch of Freescale device drivers and such as well for machines in the 6xx class.
We should definitely continue to support ppc32 machines. There are a *lot* of embedded ppc32 machines around.
- Which machine type are supported? Seems POWER7, possibly POWER6
and 5. I would imagine we would want to explicitly drop PS3 support given it's limited memory (vs initrd) and the fact that it's not really sustainable as a machine due to firmware changes. However, do we support Apple G5 and Powerstation machines? (I think yes, but it's unclear).
Well, as I have an Apple G5 and even created the mentioned DVD iso on it I will be quite unhappy if I can't install the latest Fedora on it. Looks good so far, even the big initrd isn't an issue on that machine as long as I don't try a network install (tftp limitations)
.....
What packages still *don't* build in the 64-bit versions, and would be missing (or bizarrely 32-bit-only) if we have 64-bit as the primary arch on ppc64?
We were typically just not caring about the PPC64 ExcludeArch tracker bug, although I have a distinct recollection of getting drunk in a Shanghai hotel room at one point and doing OCaml support. Is that still in the Fedora packages?
Fortunately your ppc64 ocaml patch still works, although it got deleted on the primary archs. You don't happen to be in Germany anytime soon ? If getting you drunk results in a 64bit yaboot I'm sure I'll find a nice pub somewhere around here ;-)
Creating 64bit images with an additional 32bit glibc just for yaboot is suboptimal, but seems to work so far. I stil need to convince mash to pull that in during the compose, though. I'd appreciate it if someone could have a look at yaboot, but if that's too much work we can keep it that way while waiting for grub2.
Karsten
On 04/28/2011 11:47 PM, Karsten Hopp wrote:
Am 28.04.2011 20:24, schrieb David Woodhouse:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 13:36 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Additional items to cover are:
- Are ppc32 machines supported? Specifically I'm thinking of Apple
G4 machines, but we used to build a bunch of Freescale device drivers and such as well for machines in the 6xx class.
We should definitely continue to support ppc32 machines. There are a *lot* of embedded ppc32 machines around.
- Which machine type are supported? Seems POWER7, possibly POWER6
and 5. I would imagine we would want to explicitly drop PS3 support given it's limited memory (vs initrd) and the fact that it's not really sustainable as a machine due to firmware changes. However, do we support Apple G5 and Powerstation machines? (I think yes, but it's unclear).
Well, as I have an Apple G5 and even created the mentioned DVD iso on it I will be quite unhappy if I can't install the latest Fedora on it. Looks good so far, even the big initrd isn't an issue on that machine as long as I don't try a network install (tftp limitations)
.....
What packages still *don't* build in the 64-bit versions, and would be missing (or bizarrely 32-bit-only) if we have 64-bit as the primary arch on ppc64?
We were typically just not caring about the PPC64 ExcludeArch tracker bug, although I have a distinct recollection of getting drunk in a Shanghai hotel room at one point and doing OCaml support. Is that still in the Fedora packages?
Fortunately your ppc64 ocaml patch still works, although it got deleted on the primary archs. You don't happen to be in Germany anytime soon ? If getting you drunk results in a 64bit yaboot I'm sure I'll find a nice pub somewhere around here ;-)
Hey guys,
where in Germany are you (or anybody else on this list) located, approximately?
Timo
Creating 64bit images with an additional 32bit glibc just for yaboot is suboptimal, but seems to work so far. I stil need to convince mash to pull that in during the compose, though. I'd appreciate it if someone could have a look at yaboot, but if that's too much work we can keep it that way while waiting for grub2.
Karsten
Dear Timo Schoeler,
In message 4DB9D3F9.6070109@riscworks.net you wrote:
where in Germany are you (or anybody else on this list) located, approximately?
Groebenzell, i. e. on the outskirts of Munich. http://maps.google.com/maps/place?cid=8718870717300191369
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Timo Schoeler
where in Germany are you (or anybody else on this list) located, approximately?
Not in Germany: Felton, California, USA, in Santa Cruz County just over a small mountain ridge from the Silicon Valley. I have a wide array of PPC Macs in my lab running Fedora, Debian and openSUSE. Thank you guys for keeping the PPC flame alive in Fedora.
I lurk here mostly since I am still learning programming, but someday I'd like to be good enough at it to contribute.
Larry Cafiero
* Timo Schoeler
Hey guys,
where in Germany are you (or anybody else on this list) located, approximately?
I live in Oslo, Norway.
And talking about older hardware, when booted, my eMac (800MHz G4) is happily running Fedora 12, waiting stubbornly for an update. I also think I should be able to yum update my 7046-B50 (375MHz 604e) (it has Fedora 9, I think) to newer fedoras as well, though they can't run the installer anymore because of the initrd size.
I've also been talked into taking care of three 9124-720 (1.5GHz P5) boxes, though I probably don't have storage for them all over time. I did a test install of RHEL6 on one of them with no problems, but I'd prefer Fedora.
Ingvar
On 04/29/2011 08:51 AM, Ingvar Hagelund wrote:
I also think I should be able to yum update my 7046-B50 (375MHz 604e) (it has Fedora 9, I think) to newer fedoras as well, though they can't run the installer anymore because of the initrd size.
I have a 43P-150 box (375MHz 604e, 512MB mem) which has an old version of Fedora. Would be cool if it could run F15 or F16. I'll be happy to test boot images. Iirc last time took quite some effort and much appreciated help from David Woodhouse to get the box to boot.
Regards, Patrick
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:47 +0200, Karsten Hopp wrote:
Creating 64bit images with an additional 32bit glibc just for yaboot is suboptimal, but seems to work so far.
Why does yaboot use glibc? Isn't it built with -nostdlib? The issue was libextfs.a, wasn't it? And didn't we solve that somehow?
Would a 64-bit yaboot even *work* on most firmwares?
My roaming the world and drinking is somewhat curtailed these days, but Berlin for GUADEC / Desktop Summit may be a possibility...
On 04/28/2011 01:36 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
- Are ppc32 machines supported? Specifically I'm thinking of Apple
G4 machines, but we used to build a bunch of Freescale device drivers and such as well for machines in the 6xx class.
Just from a demand perspective, this summer Apple will drop support for OSX 10.5 and within a short time leave Mac G4 users without security updates - there's a lot of decent hardware out there that's not quite five years old yet. Fedora 15 on ppc32 might just gain a number of new users at that point.
Thanks for all the work!
-Bill
On 28/04/11 14:15, Phil Knirsch wrote:
Hi everyone.
Just wanted to give you all a brief heads up that Fedora on PPC as a secondary arch is still alive and kicking and no dead horse!
On a more serious note, we've recently been catching up to the current Fedora 15 packages after PowerPC moved to secondary arch status after Fedora 12. This took a while, but thanks to pretty powerful builders and concentrated effort from the PowerPC team we've gotten pretty close to catching up by now.
The current focus is to get the installer to work properly again. With the switch to Lorax, the new unified initrd and other changes we hit a few problems recently, but at least we've had a successful install with the latest mash trees on a Power7 machine recently via DVD [1].
Discussions are still ongoing on how to solve the unified initrd size problem though as currently for Power6 or Power5 the new initrd is just too large to ever work, even if it would be better compressed. So we might have to go back to a 2 stage install process for PowerPC at least, but very likely with a dracut based 1st stage then.
Due to these installer problems we're probably not going to be able to have an official PowerPC release for Fedora 15, but the goal is to definitely get it done for Fedora 16.
Thanks to everyone working on getting PowerPC in Fedora back into shape!
For more information, feel free to visit the Fedora PowerPC wiki:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/PowerPC
Thanks & regards, Phil
[1] http://ppc.koji.fedoraproject.org/mnt/koji/scratch/karsten/iso/
Hi,
I've looked at the page on PowerPC and it still mentions the PS3, but it seems to be stuck at Fedora 11.
When you say PPC, do you plan to have it run on the PS3 again?
Cheers
-
Andrea -
Bill McGonigle -
Dan Horák -
David Woodhouse -
Ingvar Hagelund -
Josh Boyer -
Karsten Hopp -
Larry Cafiero -
Patrick Lists -
Peter Lemenkov -
Phil Knirsch -
Timo Schoeler -
Wolfgang Denk