[fedora-arm] OpenOffice RPMs

Rich Mattes richmattes at gmail.com
Wed Dec 29 22:39:56 UTC 2010

On 12/29/2010 03:50 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 12/29/2010 06:47 PM, omalleys at msu.edu wrote:
>> The plan is to finish 13, do 14, then 15. As I believe some or most of
>> the bugs if they are getting pushed upstream should be worked out.?
> The point I was making was that by the time we report bugs to the
> mainline Fedora, the version of Fedora we are reporting against is
> already EOL-ed, because there is such a huge gap betwen a Fedora release
> becoming available for x86 and the ARM rootfs (not even a complete port)
> being available.
> This typically means the bugs immediately get marked as WONTFIX with a
> note saying "check the latest release and raise a new bug against that"
> - which we can't do because we're too far behind in the ARM land.

Fedora 12 is what's currently available, from a previous ARM port 
effort.  It's not supported anymore.  The ARM SIG is targeting F13 (now 
and onward.
>> There may be a branch at f15 at or around the cortex processors.
> Yes, so I hear - the hardfp branch. Having said that, according to some
> benchmarks, even softfp armv7l target yields decent performance
> improvements over armv5tel in some applications, e.g. audio/video codecs
> and databases:
> http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=robertcnelson-3173-25135-22766
>> I kind of wonder why openssl needs krb5. OpenSSH i can see needing krb5
>> and openssl. And I can see krb5 needing openssl for gssapi...
> Beats me.
>>> I'm more than a little surprised that ARM Fedora is so neglected. The
>>> build is very incomplete. This is particularly odd considering that all
>>> the src.rpm packages seem to build just fine.
>> I was trying to figure this one out too.
> I'll get building and see what comes out. Will set up a repository with
> packages that aren't in the main Fedora repository when I have a
> reasonable amount. It'll take a while, though - my main build box is a
> Sheeva Plug! :-O
> It would also be really nice if we were to establish a selection of
> proper rpm kernel packages for at least the most common platforms, e.g.:
> - Marvell Kirkwood for the Sheeva Plug
> - Freescale i.MX515 for the Genesi Efika
> - nVidia Tegra 2 for the Toshiba AC100
> and no doubt others, too. I mention the above specifically because I own
> these devices and thus intend to have a go at building the suitable
> packages for them. It is after all, a community effort, right? ;)

I think the plan is to eventually get ARM kernels based on the Fedora 
kernel sources built for many different development boards.  Currently, 
all effort is focused on getting the F13 package collection built.  Your 
efforts would certainly be welcome should you try to tackle kernel builds.

I'll also note that the latest F13 koji builds are already available in 
a repo: http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/repos/dist-f13-build/latest/  
That's the repo that was used to generate the F13 rootfs.  As packages 
are built, this repo should approach the coverage of the primary 
architectures' repositories.

>>> Ubuntu, OTOH, seem to have much better support for ARM. Are there plans
>>> to catch up?
>> Ubuntu is further because it is really Debian unstable. (although I
>> think debian is better..)
> Sure - but Fedora is "RHEL unstable". I really don't think we have an
> excuse for being this far behind them.
Ubuntu and Debian have been working on this for a much longer time.  The 
current Fedora effort is only several months old, and builds off of the 
incomplete F12 package collection.  Further, we only got F13's gcc and 
glibc working on ARM two months ago, which held up pretty much all 
progress.  Most of the big problems have been knocked out, and things 
are indeed progressing.  I don't really understand the pessimism, my 
perception is that things are going quite well (it's taken under two 
months to get a working F13 rootfs!)  I don't think that ARM fedora is 
being neglected at all, it's just a young effort and the results aren't 
immediately apparent yet.

>>> It's not really an issue, there's always a way around it, but I thought
>>> that there should be no circular dependencies in either the binary or
>>> source packages.
>> Ideally there shouldn't be. :)
> Since F13 is just around the corner, I'll revisit the issue as soon as
> the rootfs for that is ready.

Alpha-quality rootfs is available for you to play with: see above.  krb5 
can be built without OpenSSL for bootstraping, the option is at the top 
of the krb5 specfile.  Several packages need to be bootstrapped in a 
similar fashion: Mono requires mono-devel for instance.
>>> Oh, OK. I thought it was the same bugzilla. Doesn't the ARM one feed to
>>> the main one? Why are they even separate?
>>> Have you got a URL handy for the Fedora ARM bugzilla?
>> I'm not sure there is one, or whether it is part of the bugzilla. The
>> only things I have really found are local to the arm project. I would
>> rather send an email then fill out a form. lol
>> I can seem to use my fedora account to login to the arm koji.
>> Im getting https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/login is handing me
>> back a
>> (Error code: ssl_error_handshake_failure_alert)
> I was referring to http://bugzilla.redhat.com. Interestingly, there are
> options for target platforms based on ARM. But there are several that
> should arguably be collapsed together because there is only one
> supported target. The list contains:
> arm7
> arm9
> strongarm
> xscale
> Those should really all be collapsed down to armv5tel for now, since
> that is the only target available. Where do we file bugzilla reports
> against bugzilla? ;)
I guess nobody has addressed this yet; most of the build errors thus far 
have been fixed over IRC or through the list.  There is, however, a 
"bugzilla" product in the redhat bugzilla where you can file bugs 
against the redhat 

>> Oh and python twisted is broken at the core level which is needed for
>> buildbot.
> You mean the ARM build of it is broken?
> I must admit, I was not really intending to use it. My basic approach
> was going to be to set up a vserver chroot, install all available
> packages into it, download all available src.rpms and:
> iterate
> 	build all src.rpms for packages that haven't been installed yet
> 	install/update all the packages that have successfully built
> end
> More packages should build with each iteration until only those that
> don't build cleanly on this platform remain. Those then need
> investigating further, but that's a number of CPU-weeks of building on
> my Sheeva Plug...

Luckily, this is already happening on the ARM koji for F13 and beyond.  
There's a status page at http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/status/  It 
might be easier to look for build failures there to fix than to 
duplicate the effort (it's certainly faster).  You could either set up a 
mock config to build locally, or just install the f13 rootfs.

>>>>>> It is probably going to take quite a bit of time to compile. Given
>>>>>> there isn't a compiled version for arm, it will probably take more
>>>>>> work then just a recompile.
>>>>> Well:
>>>>> 1st attempt:
>>>>> OOM-ed with only 512MB of RAM (I wanted to avoid swapping onto SD, it's
>>>>> painful enough without the extra disk I/O it causes).
>>>> fwiw, when i did kernel build time testing with the guruplug. I tried
>>>> nfs, and a usb/esata drive plugged into either port. nfs with the nosync
>>>> option was the fastest (50 minutes) and both esata and usb2 were roughly
>>>> the same time at 60 minutes.
>>> Yeah, I can believe that. NFS over GbE with async is pretty quick. Build
>>> performance on the Toshiba AC100 is quite good when I LD_PRELOAD
>>> libeatmydata.so (eats all the fsyncs - I know, I know, at my peril),
>>> even onto a slow SD card or USB stick. I figured that 2x Cortex A9 @
>>> 1GHz would build it quicker than 1x Feroceon @ 1.2GHz.
>> My guess is the 2x cortex will sometimes be quicker then the Feroceon.
>> :) I would actually like to performance test them. :)
> I'd expect the Cortex A8 to outpace the Feroceon. A9 (being 2-4 A8s)
> should easily blow it away.
> Performance-wise, I fully intend to do some testing, but getting more
> packages built is a higher priority at the moment.
>>> Then again, with it taking so long, distcc is rapidly becoming tempting.
>>> Since I'm very much meaning to get a lot more involved in this, I'm
>>> pondering cramming a pile of Panda Boards into a 3U chassis I have lying
>>> around.
>> I wish I had bunch of panda boards lying around, I would probably put
>> then in a chassis with a switch but I would need fundage lol. I wish the
>> panda board had usb3 or esata and dual nic gigE's. I would have bought
>> one of those for sure.
> The advantage of Panda is that it is quite cheap and decently specced.
> If you want something fancier, these look really noce, and they come in
> uATX for factor, but they are expensive and only if you want 100+/year:
> http://www.compulab.co.il/a510/html/a510-sb-datasheet.htm

There are plans to add some pandaboards to the koji buildfarm as well: 

>>>>> 2nd attempt:
>>>>> Failed because the build process used up all 8GB of space on the SD
>>>>> card
>>>>> and died.
>>>> Im surprised at this.. it doesn't -seem- like it should be quite that
>>>> big.
>>> By my reckoning in terms of how long I think it should take to build (18
>>> hours or so), it was only about half way through by the time it ran out
>>> of disk space. So I expect it to be significantly bigger than this.
>> That seems to big.. almost like there is a memory issue ie hitting a
>> 4gig limit and starting over or something weird or it is rebuilding it
>> too many times.
> See the other thread. Dan said it can take up to 30GB of disk space.
> Since I've no way of attaching that to my AC100, it's going to have to
> be NFS-backed on the Sheeva. This may take some days...
Maybe set mock up to work off of a USB hard drive on the Sheeva (if you 
have one laying around?)

>>>>> Considering how much I've had to build from src.rpms (shockingly, I've
>>>>> not yet found anything that actually failed to build cleanly), I'm
>>>>> half-tempted to put up a repository of my own when I'm done. Given that
>>>>> ARM netbooks are becoming more popular I'm sure I won't be the only one
>>>>> looking for these.
>>>> I was hoping the f13 would be released for xmas. :) but it appears like
>>>> f12 is going to be around a bit longer..
>>> I am reasonably eagerly awaiting F13, but will that build be any more
>>> complete than the F12 build is? If not, I need to be thinking about a
>>> rack of Sheeva Plugs (or maybe Panda Boards) for building the missing
>>> packages. :)
>> I think it will be more complete. You can supposedly get an account on
>> the arm koji, but as mentioned my login did fail. I am assuming the
>> certificate is wrong for the hostname or it isn't configured correctly
>> somehow. You can view it by looking at http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/
> I just tried it, and it does seem quite thoroughly broken. :(

The web interface seems broken at the moment, but it's still possible to 
submit builds via the command line using directions at 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Package_Maintainers.  I 
just submitted a scratch build without issue.

>>> In all seriousness, though - it seems that ARM netbooks (and servers!)
>>> are very much imminently coming in numbers, and I think there should at
>>> least exist a possibility of a comfortable and complete RH/Fedora
>>> experience.
>> I'm hoping it can be a good possibility too. I'm cheap. I like the
>> energy savings. :)
> I meant the possibility of comfortably running Fedora instead of Ubuntu. :)

Give it time, F13 and beyond are striving to reach package parity with 
the primary architectures (as much as is possible anyway.)  The effort 
is young, but making lots of progress.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/arm/attachments/20101229/4c0d3f0b/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the arm mailing list