Re: Shipping more installer images?
Efraim Flashner skribis: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 01:47:25PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> >> >> I'm actually not really sure how one would use the installer on one of >> >> the boards. I think the bare-bones disk-images would be best; just >> >> download it and flash it onto the board or an SD card and edit >> >> /etc/config.scm to add your user and services. Or to boot up into the >> >> installer and overwrite itself. >> > >> > The CI is already building substitutes for two images >> > (hurd-barebones-qcow2-image and pine64-barebones-raw-image). We could >> > maybe release 1.2 version of those images. >> >> Keep in mind that images use space at ftp.gnu.org and also take time to >> build (having CI up-to-date helps with that, but it doesn’t not >> eliminate build times due to the ‘update-guix-package’ dance that takes >> place during “make release”.) > > We could also list out the commands for building the image and have > "community images" built and tested by people who actually have the > boards. Yeah, though “community images” could rhyme with “we’re-not-sure-what’s-inside images”. :-) >> Likewise, if we ship more images, we should update the “System >> Installation” section accordingly and be clear about what users can >> expect. > > My slightly more featureful pine64plus image I built for myself came out > to 1.5 GiB and 291 MiB with bzip2. I don't know how much space the other > images or x86* images are. Cool. > We could also build and test them on a different schedule and upload > them at a later date as they're shown to be working. Hmm, tricky, security-wise. Anyway, let’s work on that for 1.3! Ludo’.
Re: Shipping more installer images?
Hi, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> So that’s 3 more 1 GiB installer images, right? If we target Oct. 29th, >> how are we going to test them in the meantime? How long will it take to >> build them, even assuming we build on an OverDrive? > > I plan to provide compressed disk images for those boards so it's more > around 400MB. Anyway, compression patches are not available yet and I > don't even own one of those boards. > > So, while we can provide latest images for those boards, having them in > a stable image will wait 1.3 I guess. OK, sounds like a more reasonable plan to me! :-) Ludo’.
Re: Shipping more installer images?
Hi Ludo, On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 15:51:19 +0200 Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > IMO there are only very few RYF-worthy ARM devices--and we should support > > at least those, if we support any ARM devices at all. That includes > > providing images for those few (at least A20-EOMA68, A?0*Olinuxino*, and > > Novena). > > So that’s 3 more 1 GiB installer images, right? If we target Oct. 29th, > how are we going to test them in the meantime? How long will it take to > build them, even assuming we build on an OverDrive? Sure, I didn't mean "provide them in this release". I meant: eventually. pgpluc_OUmEP7.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Shipping more installer images?
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 01:47:25PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > > >> I'm actually not really sure how one would use the installer on one of > >> the boards. I think the bare-bones disk-images would be best; just > >> download it and flash it onto the board or an SD card and edit > >> /etc/config.scm to add your user and services. Or to boot up into the > >> installer and overwrite itself. > > > > The CI is already building substitutes for two images > > (hurd-barebones-qcow2-image and pine64-barebones-raw-image). We could > > maybe release 1.2 version of those images. > > Keep in mind that images use space at ftp.gnu.org and also take time to > build (having CI up-to-date helps with that, but it doesn’t not > eliminate build times due to the ‘update-guix-package’ dance that takes > place during “make release”.) We could also list out the commands for building the image and have "community images" built and tested by people who actually have the boards. > Likewise, if we ship more images, we should update the “System > Installation” section accordingly and be clear about what users can > expect. My slightly more featureful pine64plus image I built for myself came out to 1.5 GiB and 291 MiB with bzip2. I don't know how much space the other images or x86* images are. We could also build and test them on a different schedule and upload them at a later date as they're shown to be working. > I guess all I’m saying is that we should not make such decisions lightly > and be sure to examine all the consequences. > > Thanks, > Ludo’. -- Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Shipping more installer images?
Hey Ludo, > So that’s 3 more 1 GiB installer images, right? If we target Oct. 29th, > how are we going to test them in the meantime? How long will it take to > build them, even assuming we build on an OverDrive? I plan to provide compressed disk images for those boards so it's more around 400MB. Anyway, compression patches are not available yet and I don't even own one of those boards. So, while we can provide latest images for those boards, having them in a stable image will wait 1.3 I guess. Thanks, Mathieu
Re: Shipping more installer images?
Hi, Danny Milosavljevic skribis: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:47:25 +0200 > Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> >> Keep in mind that images use space at ftp.gnu.org and also take time to >> build (having CI up-to-date helps with that, but it doesn’t not >> eliminate build times due to the ‘update-guix-package’ dance that takes >> place during “make release”.) >> >> Likewise, if we ship more images, we should update the “System >> Installation” section accordingly and be clear about what users can >> expect. >> >> I guess all I’m saying is that we should not make such decisions lightly >> and be sure to examine all the consequences. > > I agree. > > IMO there are only very few RYF-worthy ARM devices--and we should support > at least those, if we support any ARM devices at all. That includes > providing images for those few (at least A20-EOMA68, A?0*Olinuxino*, and > Novena). So that’s 3 more 1 GiB installer images, right? If we target Oct. 29th, how are we going to test them in the meantime? How long will it take to build them, even assuming we build on an OverDrive? I don’t want to spoil the party, I think it’d be great to better support those devices, but it seems to me that there’s still quite a lot to be done before we can offer that with reasonable confidence. Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: Shipping more installer images?
Hi Ludo, On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:47:25 +0200 Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > > Keep in mind that images use space at ftp.gnu.org and also take time to > build (having CI up-to-date helps with that, but it doesn’t not > eliminate build times due to the ‘update-guix-package’ dance that takes > place during “make release”.) > > Likewise, if we ship more images, we should update the “System > Installation” section accordingly and be clear about what users can > expect. > > I guess all I’m saying is that we should not make such decisions lightly > and be sure to examine all the consequences. I agree. IMO there are only very few RYF-worthy ARM devices--and we should support at least those, if we support any ARM devices at all. That includes providing images for those few (at least A20-EOMA68, A?0*Olinuxino*, and Novena). (Now that we use genimage in order to create guix images anyway, long term we can also provide an importer and import essentially all ARM devices from buildroot--but that can come later) pgpyRhadDcRdb.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Shipping more installer images?
Hi, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> I'm actually not really sure how one would use the installer on one of >> the boards. I think the bare-bones disk-images would be best; just >> download it and flash it onto the board or an SD card and edit >> /etc/config.scm to add your user and services. Or to boot up into the >> installer and overwrite itself. > > The CI is already building substitutes for two images > (hurd-barebones-qcow2-image and pine64-barebones-raw-image). We could > maybe release 1.2 version of those images. Keep in mind that images use space at ftp.gnu.org and also take time to build (having CI up-to-date helps with that, but it doesn’t not eliminate build times due to the ‘update-guix-package’ dance that takes place during “make release”.) Likewise, if we ship more images, we should update the “System Installation” section accordingly and be clear about what users can expect. I guess all I’m saying is that we should not make such decisions lightly and be sure to examine all the consequences. Thanks, Ludo’.
