Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: If we have a reasonably-complete F-14 soon, I'll just rebase the remaining interesting changes on top of OOB's master. Making some progress on this. I have a much smaller, cleaner patch to master. Looks like I am close to building a complete image with it. - Most of the code is in modules/xo_1_75 - where it doesn't bother anything else. It still hosts various hacks that will be removed as our infra consolidates. - Modules/sugar_activity_group needs a downgrade so that it doesn't need bitfrost code. The bitfrost code on F13 isn't modularized so it tries to read /ofw on the build host. Oops. We need a f-14 build host, or bitfrost upgrade. - Some rpms from 'base' kspkglist need to be moved to platform modules -- kernel.i586 for example :-) - Some rpms are just missing in F13-arm -- commented those out in base/gnome/sugar kspkglist -- that will need to be applied for now, removed later. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On 14 June 2011 21:46, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Daniel, Chris, looking at current olpc-os-builder, is there any gotchas you're aware of to build F-13 based images? I haven't tried, but I think Chris has got this working already. Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: I haven't tried, but I think Chris has got this working already. Chris forked from master a longish time ago, and applied whatever dirty tricks were needed to build early images. See the f13-arm branch in his user repo. As things get a bit more normal (hey! we have a kernel in an rpm! rtc support in the kernel) I am removing the hacks one by one. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On 15 June 2011 13:06, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: I haven't tried, but I think Chris has got this working already. Chris forked from master a longish time ago, and applied whatever dirty tricks were needed to build early images. See the f13-arm branch in his user repo. As things get a bit more normal (hey! we have a kernel in an rpm! rtc support in the kernel) I am removing the hacks one by one. That sounds like a sensible approach. Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: That sounds like a sensible approach. Yes but I am still based on a rather old OOB and wondering whether to rebase to tip of master -- instead of for example cherry picking bits I want/need. So I ask: any reason to expect it not to work with f13? cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On 15 June 2011 13:37, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: That sounds like a sensible approach. Yes but I am still based on a rather old OOB and wondering whether to rebase to tip of master -- instead of for example cherry picking bits I want/need. So I ask: any reason to expect it not to work with f13? Ah, now I understand the question. Generally there are a fair number of changes between each Fedora version which make one branch specific to one Fedora version, and it would be a pain to make it support 2. This is certainly true for F11 vs F12, and F14 vs F15. F14 vs F13 I haven't tried. I would recommend keeping your own branch for it, and at a quick glance I can't see anything new in master that is terribly interesting for you anyway. I would keep going with the branch you have already, cherry picking anything you know you want from master, and focus any remaining time on getting F14 working. Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On 15 June 2011 13:37, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: That sounds like a sensible approach. Yes but I am still based on a rather old OOB and wondering whether to rebase to tip of master -- instead of for example cherry picking bits I want/need. So I ask: any reason to expect it not to work with f13? Ah, now I understand the question. Generally there are a fair number of changes between each Fedora version which make one branch specific to one Fedora version, and it would be a pain to make it support 2. This is certainly true for F11 vs F12, and F14 vs F15. F14 vs F13 I haven't tried. I would recommend keeping your own branch for it, and at a quick glance I can't see anything new in master that is terribly interesting for you anyway. I would keep going with the branch you have already, cherry picking anything you know you want from master, and focus any remaining time on getting F14 working. The major change from F-13 - F-14 was python 2.7, alot of the rest of it was quite a minor update from a desktop perspective, but I suspect for us the move to 2.7 will have a large effect. We're getting closer, my A3 arrived today and I'm hoping to be able to spin up first XO 1.75 image in the next day or so, although it will be cut down to mostly console we've got most of the X deps there and once the issues with the koji hub settle down we should be full steam ahead for mass rebuild. Any noarch packages (alot of the python) will be just mass imported from upstream too. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: The major change from F-13 - F-14 was python 2.7, alot of the rest of it was quite a minor update from a desktop perspective, but I suspect for us the move to 2.7 will have a large effect. Right -- that probably won't affect OOB. But any changes in prefdm, tty/console handling will. We're getting closer, my A3 arrived today and I'm hoping to be able to spin up first XO 1.75 image in the next day or so, although it will be cut down to mostly console we've got most of the X deps there and once the issues Do you mean F-14 image or F13? I'd suggest: don't worry about building an image yet, focus on the F-14 rebuild and the problematic packages (that list that included csound, libabiword...) plus those we need for dracut-modules-olpc (busybox its deps...). When you want to work on full images for the XO, let me know and we'll have a good session on irc/skype/whatever on koji2 where I can show you what we have. What I'd prefer -- it it sounds reasonable -- is that you help us get the core of f-14 stuff ready, and then I'd just rebase the bits from our f13-arm OOB branch on the tip of master. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: I would recommend keeping your own branch for it, and at a quick glance I can't see anything new in master that is terribly interesting for you anyway. I would keep going with the branch you have already, cherry picking anything you know you want from master, and focus any remaining time on getting F14 working. That's what I'd recommend in the general situation too; however I *am* cherry-picking many bits and pieces, with tricky conflict resolution in some cases. So hence I ask whether there's known F-13 issues. None known, and I can't see any major transitions so I may try it -- later. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: The major change from F-13 - F-14 was python 2.7, alot of the rest of it was quite a minor update from a desktop perspective, but I suspect for us the move to 2.7 will have a large effect. Right -- that probably won't affect OOB. But any changes in prefdm, tty/console handling will. We're getting closer, my A3 arrived today and I'm hoping to be able to spin up first XO 1.75 image in the next day or so, although it will be cut down to mostly console we've got most of the X deps there and once the issues Do you mean F-14 image or F13? I'd suggest: don't worry about building an image yet, focus on the F-14 rebuild and the problematic packages (that list that included csound, libabiword...) plus those we need for dracut-modules-olpc (busybox its deps...). My main reason for wanting to get F-14 running on the XO HW is so I can start testing core components so if we do have issues there I can fix them earlier rather than later. There might be an easier way to do this booting of SD or similar. Open to ideas. Busybox is mostly done for F-14, there's issues I'm still looking at for F-13. I believe libabiword on F-13 is built. I'll look at csound shortly. I can compile a special version for F-13 if you like as I suspect the lack of java on F-13 is what's causing issues there and its likely not worth spending lots of time on that for F-13. When you want to work on full images for the XO, let me know and we'll have a good session on irc/skype/whatever on koji2 where I can show you what we have. Absolutely! What I'd prefer -- it it sounds reasonable -- is that you help us get the core of f-14 stuff ready, and then I'd just rebase the bits from our f13-arm OOB branch on the tip of master. OK, from the diff I did when you were in London there didn't look to be massive changes to it, mostly hacks to work around ARM side of things and removal of missing packages. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: My main reason for wanting to get F-14 running on the XO HW is so I can start testing core components so if we do have issues there I can fix them earlier rather than later. There might be an easier way to do this booting of SD or similar. Open to ideas. Sure. I'd make a root fs on an SD card, you can grab the kernel rpms from http://dev.laptop.org/~martin/public_rpms/f13-arm/ And grab boot.fth from any recent img. Currently the xo will favour an ext SD card for booting, so just place it there, with /boot/olpc.fth and off it'll go. Busybox is mostly done for F-14, there's issues I'm still looking at for F-13. I believe libabiword on F-13 is built. I'll look at csound shortly. I Excellent news. If F14 is progressing, then focus on that. I don't _actually_ care about F13 except as a step to get us there :-) What I'd prefer -- it it sounds reasonable -- is that you help us get the core of f-14 stuff ready, and then I'd just rebase the bits from our f13-arm OOB branch on the tip of master. OK, from the diff I did when you were in London there didn't look to be massive changes to it, mostly hacks to work around ARM side of things and removal of missing packages. I haven't pushed stuff out but look if you want into koji2.laptop.org:/home/martin/src/olpc-os-builder It's rather messy -- cjb had to force quite a few things, and I am undoing them as I get through. The resulting history is horrid and forgettable. If we have a reasonably-complete F-14 soon, I'll just rebase the remaining interesting changes on top of OOB's master. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Current oob - any clear F13 incompat?
Hi Daniel, Chris, looking at current olpc-os-builder, is there any gotchas you're aware of to build F-13 based images? The F-14 rebuild is taking a bit longer than expected, and I am fairly advanced in cleaning up the hacks we needed earlier to get builds for F-13/ARM. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
