What's the status of EPEL7 on i686? I haven't heard anything in a few months but last I heard EPEL was going to be trialed on antoehr alt-arch before i686, was this done yet and what's the current hold-up?
Peter
Hi If I heard well they said they are not interessed by a 32bits EPEL7 repo.
De : Peter peter@pajamian.dhs.org À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 10h45 Objet : [EPEL-devel] 32 bit revisited
What's the status of EPEL7 on i686? I haven't heard anything in a few months but last I heard EPEL was going to be trialed on antoehr alt-arch before i686, was this done yet and what's the current hold-up?
Peter _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.or...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:46:04 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi If I heard well they said they are not interessed by a 32bits EPEL7 repo.
I'm not sure where you heard that.
De : Peter <peter@pajamian.dhs.org>À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 10h45 Objet : [EPEL-devel] 32 bit revisited
What's the status of EPEL7 on i686? I haven't heard anything in a few months but last I heard EPEL was going to be trialed on antoehr alt-arch before i686, was this done yet and what's the current hold-up?
ppc64le was added not long ago and seems to be working fine.
Right now we are likely just waiting on cycles from releng folks to look at what it would take to bring i686 up. The method used for ppc64le seemed to work pretty well (scratch build all packages, fix issues then import the i686 builds into koji so they just appear next to the rest).
kevin
Hi everybody Where are we now with the project of 32bits epel7 repo ? Thanks
De : Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc : john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 23h05 Objet : [EPEL-devel] Re: 32 bit revisited
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:46:04 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi If I heard well they said they are not interessed by a 32bits EPEL7 repo.
I'm not sure where you heard that.
De : Peter peter@pajamian.dhs.org À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 10h45 Objet : [EPEL-devel] 32 bit revisited What's the status of EPEL7 on i686? I haven't heard anything in a few months but last I heard EPEL was going to be trialed on antoehr alt-arch before i686, was this done yet and what's the current hold-up?
ppc64le was added not long ago and seems to be working fine.
Right now we are likely just waiting on cycles from releng folks to look at what it would take to bring i686 up. The method used for ppc64le seemed to work pretty well (scratch build all packages, fix issues then import the i686 builds into koji so they just appear next to the rest).
kevin _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.or...
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
Regards,
De : Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc : john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 23h05 Objet : [EPEL-devel] Re: 32 bit revisited
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:46:04 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi If I heard well they said they are not interessed by a 32bits EPEL7 repo.
I'm not sure where you heard that.
De : Peter peter@pajamian.dhs.org À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 janvier 2016 10h45 Objet : [EPEL-devel] 32 bit revisited What's the status of EPEL7 on i686? I haven't heard anything in a few months but last I heard EPEL was going to be trialed on antoehr alt-arch before i686, was this done yet and what's the current hold-up?
ppc64le was added not long ago and seems to be working fine.
Right now we are likely just waiting on cycles from releng folks to look at what it would take to bring i686 up. The method used for ppc64le seemed to work pretty well (scratch build all packages, fix issues then import the i686 builds into koji so they just appear next to the rest).
kevin _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.or...
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
I hope so, but it's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
kevin
Hi,It's up to you but it seems that, as RHEL hasn't and will never have a 32bits version, the only way would be to build against CentOS CI Thanks anyway
De : Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com À : epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc : john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com Envoyé le : Samedi 15 octobre 2016 19h43 Objet : [EPEL-devel] Re: 32 bit revisited
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
I hope so, but it's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
kevin
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 10/15/2016 10:43 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
I hope so, but it's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
I'll go out for a stretch here and ask ... what if we build not only against CentOS CI but in the CentOS build system?
- Karsten
On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:54:44 -0700 Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/15/2016 10:43 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
I hope so, but it's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
I'll go out for a stretch here and ask ... what if we build not only against CentOS CI but in the CentOS build system?
Well, not sure how that would work.
You mean when you do a 'fedpkg build' it builds the normal epel arches in the Fedora koji and also fires off a i686 build in the centos build system?
If so:
* We would need to issue certs for every epel maintainer to be able to build in centos. * Also the centos build sys would need to allow builds from Fedora pkgs source. * Things could get out of sync if the centos build and epel builds one or the other fails. * How would maintainers push updates in the centos side? Or would that just collect the builds and make a single repo/release ?
kevin
cOn 10/20/2016 07:06 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:54:44 -0700 Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/15/2016 10:43 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 +0000 (UTC) john tatt zikamev@yahoo.com wrote:
HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7 repo, as you can see. In last january, the goal was apparently to bring it just after fixing the ppc64 Do you think it will happen someday ?
I hope so, but it's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
I'll go out for a stretch here and ask ... what if we build not only against CentOS CI but in the CentOS build system?
Well, not sure how that would work.
You mean when you do a 'fedpkg build' it builds the normal epel arches in the Fedora koji and also fires off a i686 build in the centos build system?
If so:
- We would need to issue certs for every epel maintainer to be able to build in centos.
- Also the centos build sys would need to allow builds from Fedora pkgs source.
- Things could get out of sync if the centos build and epel builds one or the other fails.
- How would maintainers push updates in the centos side? Or would that just collect the builds and make a single repo/release ?
I was mainly proposing a thought experiment, and you're right, there are a lot of bits involved that doesn't make it easy. There may simply be too much inertia until we find the eventual reason to do the work.
Part of my thinking is the situation where CentOS SIGs need EPEL packages and (aiui currently) have to import to git.centos.org and build the packages on cbs.centos.org.
I'm basically back to being curious on the topic of EPEL & CentOS and how best to interact.
Regards,
- Karsten
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:55:02PM -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
Part of my thinking is the situation where CentOS SIGs need EPEL packages and (aiui currently) have to import to git.centos.org and build the packages on cbs.centos.org.
Do you mean for 32-bit in specific, or in general? In that case, why import instead of just using the packages directly?
On 10/20/2016 01:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:55:02PM -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
Part of my thinking is the situation where CentOS SIGs need EPEL packages and (aiui currently) have to import to git.centos.org and build the packages on cbs.centos.org.
Do you mean for 32-bit in specific, or in general? In that case, why import instead of just using the packages directly?
I think it's the same situation that Fedora has -- if it's not built on CentOS infra, then it can't be called "CentOS."
For end users we now have the EPEL repo package available, but that doesn't help SIG dependencies. AIUI, YMMV.
- Karsten
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 01:45:01PM -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
Do you mean for 32-bit in specific, or in general? In that case, why import instead of just using the packages directly?
I think it's the same situation that Fedora has -- if it's not built on CentOS infra, then it can't be called "CentOS."
Rebuilding things for the sake of not trusting each other seems like extra work we are making for ourselves (in both directions). Maybe we could figure out what the drivers are behind having that barrier and work on overcoming them.
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
john tatt -
Karsten Wade -
Kevin Fenzi -
Matthew Miller -
Peter