atomic, kubernetes, etc on non x86_64

[Joe Brockmeier]

On 08/28/2015 10:40 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Adam Miller
> <maxamillion at fedoraproject.org <mailto:maxamillion at fedoraproject.org>>
> wrote:
> 
>     On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us
>     <mailto:dennis at ausil.us>> wrote:
>     > Hi all,
>     >
>     > Last night I had some time to myself, I decided to look at what it would take
>     > to get atomic running on arm. after having to tweak some of the json files.
>     > the hardcoded ref in it if not flexible at all
>     > -    "ref": "fedora-atomic/rawhide/x86_64/docker-host",
>     > +    "ref": "fedora-atomic/rawhide/armhfp/docker-host",
>     >
>     > Neither is the hardcoded packages,
>     > -                "grub2", "grub2-efi", "ostree-grub2",
>     > -                "efibootmgr", "shim",
>     > +                "extlinux-bootloader",
>     >
>     > the packages in every other part of our deliverables are dealt with by using
>     > comps and yum/dnf skipping over missing things. Which made me curious about
>     > how it was envisioned to support atomic on multiple arches as it seems to be
>     > designed around a single arch silo.
>     >
>     > However once I got past that I discovered that atomic and kubernetes both had
>     > "ExclusiveArch: x86_64" in the spec files (Violating packaging guidelines in
>     > the process) but they do actually build just fine for all the primary arches
>     > and are installable on arm at least. I was able to make a atomic repo in the
>     > end.  I plan to throw together a kickstart and attempt to install it as soon
>     > as I can.
> 
>     This is awesome, let me know if you have something that you'd like
>     help testing. I have a spare TrimSlice that's currently sitting idle
>     and would love to see some Atomic action on it. :)
> 
>     >
>     > What will it take to fix the packaging and get people on board for supporting
>     > the greater world?  could it be something we work with someone like
>     > https://www.scaleway.com/ who have arm based cloud servers today to
>     support?
> 
>     How do we do that? Is there an official avenue to pursue working with
>     cloud vendors? What was the process to get the Fedora Cloud image into
>     IaaS providers with fedimg? (I assume some sort of relationship has to
>     be established between Fedora as a project and the cloud provider)
> 
>     -AdamM
> 
> 
> Send the scaleway people an email, letting them know you are asking
> officially on behalf of Fedora cloud.
> In my personal dealings, they have been very nice to work with.
> I don't know how it came about, but I know that centos has 4 machines
> dedicated to them.  I'm not saying that will happen, just saying it.

It looks like we already have Fedora on Scaleway?

https://www.scaleway.com/imagehub/fedora/

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier | Open Source and Standards (OSAS)
jzb at redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb  | http://projectatomic.io/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20150828/5bfc56d9/attachment.sig>