Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 4

[Robert Hagan]

hi.. I am new to Fedora-ppc but I do think that there should be at
least a 13.. Really it is important for us all to have some self
respect and move forward.  Although I travel too much but can arrange
a ppc unit (PowerStation) or maybe two to support this effort.   I am
a firm believer in integrity and would like to support those who also
have self respect.

Please let me know how I can help.  Best wishes to all, Robert.

On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 7:00 PM,  <fedora-ppc-request at lists.infradead.org> wrote:
> Send Fedora-ppc mailing list submissions to
>        fedora-ppc at lists.infradead.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        fedora-ppc-request at lists.infradead.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        fedora-ppc-owner at lists.infradead.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Fedora-ppc digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1 (Dan Hor?k)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:05:04 +0200
> From: Dan Hor?k <dan at danny.cz>
> To: fedora-ppc at lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 1
> Message-ID: <1276031104.2408.47.camel at eagle.danny.cz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> David Woodhouse p??e v ?t 08. 06. 2010 v 13:52 +0100:
>> On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 14:09 +0200, Timo Schoeler wrote:
>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> > Hash: SHA1
>> >
>> > thus Josh Boyer spake:
>> > > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:47:33AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> > >> On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 13:39 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > >>> On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 08:17:23PM +0300, Robert Hagan wrote:
>> > >>>> As somewhat of a novice at both Fedora and powerpc, does anyone have
>> > >>>> news on when we may expect Fedora13 for powerpc to be available?
>> > >>> There is no ETA for Fedora 13 ppc/ppc64.
>> > >> I took a quick look at this. I was _hoping_ that it would be a simple
>> > >> case of doing a compose... but there are actually quite a lot of build
>> > >> failures.
>> > >
>> > > Yes, they have grown over the past couple of months.  I tried reporting build
>> > > failures in bugzilla with limited success and I don't have time to fix them
>> > > all at the moment.
>> > >
>> > >> Is there any tool to make sense of these and find the original failure
>> > >>from which the others cascade, and to resubmit the dependent failures?
>> > >
>> > > No.  Other than the output from koji-shadow, which isn't really accessible or
>> > > easy to read over.
>> > >
>> > >> Is there a generic "Fedora secondary arches" mailing list where such
>> > >> things should be discussed?
>> > >
>> > > secondary at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > >
>> > >> Let's pick the gcc-4.4.4-5.fc13 build failure as the first one to
>> > >> investigate.... it failed in deps due to not finding /usr/lib64/libc.so.
>> > >>
>> > >> Is this because the glibc64 package isn't tagged in
>> > >> SHADOWBUILD-dist-f13-build? Perhaps because Jakub never did a build of
>> > >> glibc64 for F-13? Can we remedy that?
>> > >
>> > > This is because koji-shadow is dumb and didn't bring in the glibc64 package.
>> > > It will likely work if submitted by hand.
>> > >
>> > >> Can we get the build repositories rsynced onto bombadil so that we can
>> > >> use mock manually there?
>> > >
>> > > The repos for the tags?  Not sure.  My bandwidth is the limiting factor for
>> > > most of this and I'm hoping to get new hardware placed into the PXH2 datacenter
>> > > in not horribly long.
>>
>> How much bandwidth does it take to upload the built packages? Surely you
>> can't build them faster than you can upload them? :)
>>
>> How much CPU power do you have there, anyway?
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'm interested in this port (as well as I'm interested in a CentOS
>> > PowerPC port), but I don't have too much spare time left to be able to
>> > do some work here.
>> >
>> > However, I do have some hardware (both an IBM Power 285 and 275) as well
>> > as internet connectivity to give, as long as it is within an acceptable
>> > scale (I work for an ISP and have some colo space).
>> >
>> > So, if I can be of any help hosting stuff on x86 machines, please tell
>> > me. I could furthermore set up one of the Power machines, however it'd
>> > surely take some time.
>>
>> The issue is getting the build horsepower and the hosting in the same
>> place, I think. I'm not sure if those two boxes would suffice to do the
>> work that jwb's cluster is doing... but if so, perhaps we could cope if
>> you were to just do a basic install to each of them and connect them.
>
> from my experience in Fedora/s390x most bandwidth is needed for the hub,
> the builders (or a group of builders) can use a cache and be in a
> different location, it works quite well for us
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-ppc mailing list
> Fedora-ppc at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
>
>
> End of Fedora-ppc Digest, Vol 69, Issue 4
> *****************************************
>



-- 
Robert J. Hagan
HaganRJ at State.gov
Mil: robert.hagan at iraq.centcom.mil
DSN: 318-864 0703, COM: +1 240-553-9212
mobile: AsiaCell: +976 07808499797,  +1 401 219 1213
GvSMS: +1 502 286 9775
SIPR-only: Robert.Hagan at s-iraq.centcom.smil.mil