atomic, kubernetes, etc on non x86_64

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Friday, August 28, 2015 10:51:28 AM Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> 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/

There is a fedora remix, it does not have our kernel. 

Dennis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20150828/73083703/attachment.sig>