Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 3:18 PM Mark E. Fuller wrote: > > > > On 23/04/2021 16:57, Peter Robinson wrote: > [snip] > > > > There's the RPi4 that will work in 32 bit mode and it is available > > with 2-8gb of RAM, there's i.MX6 devices with 2+gb of RAM, there's the > > Jetson TK1 and related devices that have 4Gb of RAM as well as the arm > > based OLPC devices which have between 1 and 4Gb of RAM depending on > > the SKU. > > > Is RPi4 support documented anywhere? > I have wanted to test running Fedora Server, but never did as going from > the ARM page [0] to the linked documentation [1] to the RPi4 [2] and it > just says that it's not supported (as of 30 October 2019). > > I would be interested in testing Fedora Server on an RPi4 if it's > actually supposed to be supported. It works just fine for the server type use cases, I improved a lot of the early boot process and stabilised a number of pieces of the early boot as part of F-34, there's still no accelerated graphics, until that lands I won't mark it as supported as it generates too many support queries. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On 23/04/2021 16:57, Peter Robinson wrote: [snip] There's the RPi4 that will work in 32 bit mode and it is available with 2-8gb of RAM, there's i.MX6 devices with 2+gb of RAM, there's the Jetson TK1 and related devices that have 4Gb of RAM as well as the arm based OLPC devices which have between 1 and 4Gb of RAM depending on the SKU. Is RPi4 support documented anywhere? I have wanted to test running Fedora Server, but never did as going from the ARM page [0] to the linked documentation [1] to the RPi4 [2] and it just says that it's not supported (as of 30 October 2019). I would be interested in testing Fedora Server on an RPi4 if it's actually supposed to be supported. [snip] [0] https://arm.fedoraproject.org/ [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi#Raspberry_Pi_4 -- Mark E. Fuller, Ph.D. ful...@fedoraproject.org ful...@stossrohr.net @mefuller:matrix.org https://www.stossrohr.net PGP Fingerprint: 73F1 A30C BDF4 DB4B C75F FD0F D599 E76C FFCA BF60 ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
> > If there is documentation or marketing that gives the impression that > > Workstation on 32-bit ARM is some sort of > > priority/"supported"/recommended/blocking/whatever environment, it > > should be changed. > > The whole arm.fedoraproject.org website makes it seem like that. We > actually *don't* have a site for AArch64 stuff at all, as far as I can > tell. In most cases for things like Workstation/Server they're on the main pages, for other pieces they're linked from the Alternate Architectures page [1] which is linked from near the Spins/Labs but overall it's quite disjointed and could likely just be linked directly from the various spins pages. [1] https://alt.fedoraproject.org/alt/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 3:29 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-04-23 at 09:07 -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote: > > Thanks for following up. I was mostly trying to gauge if this was common > > enough it should be a proposed blocker. > > > > Now, not to be a stick in the mud, but what other common armhfp hardware > > is out there? If the Pi 3B+ isn't "up to the task", perhaps desktop > > images that aren't expected work should just be dropped? I'm not sure a > > desktop environment running on armhfp in a VM is that common of a use case. > > > > We're now looking at publicly releasing a version of Fedora that > > apparently just doesn't work when all immediately obvious documentation > > implies it should. > > I can't speak to "immediately obvious documentation", but it's worth > remembering that Workstation on 32-bit ARM is not release blocking by > policy. See: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/34/ReleaseBlocking > the only release-blocking 32-bit ARM image left is minimal, and the > release criteria preamble state: > "The current set of release-blocking desktops for x86_64 is GNOME and > KDE, and for aarch64 is GNOME. No desktop is release-blocking for 32- > bit ARM." > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#Basic_Release_Requirements > > If there is documentation or marketing that gives the impression that > Workstation on 32-bit ARM is some sort of > priority/"supported"/recommended/blocking/whatever environment, it > should be changed. The whole arm.fedoraproject.org website makes it seem like that. We actually *don't* have a site for AArch64 stuff at all, as far as I can tell. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On 4/23/21 2:57 PM, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
[Snip]
As noted, the other desktop environments work just fine. I plan on
submitting a PR to the ARM landing page noting the 2GB RAM requirement
for Workstation, similar to that which appears on the "regular" landing
page[1] ("Fedora requires a minimum of 20GB disk, 2GB RAM, to install
and run successfully. Double those amounts is recommended.").
Cancel the PR, I see the 2 GB requirement is already documented in the
Fedora Docs[0]. As per usual, I should probably just read more.
[0] -
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f33/release-notes/welcome/Hardware_Overview/#hardware_overview-specs
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On 4/23/21 2:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
[Snip]
If there is documentation or marketing that gives the impression that
Workstation on 32-bit ARM is some sort of
priority/"supported"/recommended/blocking/whatever environment, it
should be changed.
This particular bug also impacts aarch64, which led me down the rabbit
hole of trying to figure out what is and isn't expected to work on a Pi.
The marketing[0] certainly implies to me armhfp is a main Fedora product
even if it's not a blocker in QA terms, it's what all the "Desktop
Computing" download links point to which has Workstation at the very top.
As noted, the other desktop environments work just fine. I plan on
submitting a PR to the ARM landing page noting the 2GB RAM requirement
for Workstation, similar to that which appears on the "regular" landing
page[1] ("Fedora requires a minimum of 20GB disk, 2GB RAM, to install
and run successfully. Double those amounts is recommended.").
[0] - https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
[1] - https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/download/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On Fri, 2021-04-23 at 09:07 -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote: > Thanks for following up. I was mostly trying to gauge if this was common > enough it should be a proposed blocker. > > Now, not to be a stick in the mud, but what other common armhfp hardware > is out there? If the Pi 3B+ isn't "up to the task", perhaps desktop > images that aren't expected work should just be dropped? I'm not sure a > desktop environment running on armhfp in a VM is that common of a use case. > > We're now looking at publicly releasing a version of Fedora that > apparently just doesn't work when all immediately obvious documentation > implies it should. I can't speak to "immediately obvious documentation", but it's worth remembering that Workstation on 32-bit ARM is not release blocking by policy. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/34/ReleaseBlocking the only release-blocking 32-bit ARM image left is minimal, and the release criteria preamble state: "The current set of release-blocking desktops for x86_64 is GNOME and KDE, and for aarch64 is GNOME. No desktop is release-blocking for 32- bit ARM." https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#Basic_Release_Requirements If there is documentation or marketing that gives the impression that Workstation on 32-bit ARM is some sort of priority/"supported"/recommended/blocking/whatever environment, it should be changed. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
On 4/23/21 9:57 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: [Snip] This brings up my major frustration with Fedora on ARM since I've started poking at it. A "regular user" wanting to run Fedora on their Pi is going to go to the Fedora ARM landing page[0]. That page doesn't make it immediately clear what works on what hardware. If the user doesn't give up, they may scroll down and see the Documentation link and follow it to the Fedora ARM wiki page[1]. Scrolling there they will see "Supported Hardware and Devices" with "Raspberry Pi" right on top. That page[2] repeatedly lists Workstation as supported on the 3B+, in the introduction, under supported hardware, under pre-requestites (where a video cable is suggested, implying something other than minimal should work), and as explicitly under supported images. No caveats are given. End rant. I really am appreciative of Fedora on ARM. Thanks for listening. Maybe if you'd bought this up in an appropriate place, such as the arm mailing list or the weekly meeting we could address it, or maybe just ask the status and people's thoughts on IRC and see what the status is and whether it makes sense to updating the documentation for these devices and then volunteering to do it for the arm team? Peter I apologize if I stepped on any toes, but I see this as a QA issue. I will gladly update documentation (and I do so when I find mistakes in the documentation). But if we're going to heavily suggest hardware is supported, that means I'm going to run test cases against it (which I did). If they fail, I'm going to file bugs (which I did). If that failure violates a release criteria (it does) I'm going to try to see how common it really is (probably should have been on the ARM list admittedly, but I already have issues keeping up with all my e-mail, Fedora related or not, and I really don't have time to linger on IRC). If it's a one off, I shrug and move on. Since this is apparently a known caveat, I posted my rant. Which I shouldn't have done. Feel free to tell me how if want the Wiki pages modified to make it clear Workstation is not expected to work on the 3B+. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
> Now, not to be a stick in the mud, but what other common armhfp hardware > is out there? If the Pi 3B+ isn't "up to the task", perhaps desktop > images that aren't expected work should just be dropped? I'm not sure a > desktop environment running on armhfp in a VM is that common of a use case. There's the RPi4 that will work in 32 bit mode and it is available with 2-8gb of RAM, there's i.MX6 devices with 2+gb of RAM, there's the Jetson TK1 and related devices that have 4Gb of RAM as well as the arm based OLPC devices which have between 1 and 4Gb of RAM depending on the SKU. > We're now looking at publicly releasing a version of Fedora that > apparently just doesn't work when all immediately obvious documentation > implies it should. The RPi3 works with XFCE, Sugar and others quite well, the issue with Workstation on that device is the GPU allocates 256Mb of the available 1Gb to CMA for V-RAM which means in fact you have significantly less than 1Gb of RAM. > This brings up my major frustration with Fedora on ARM since I've > started poking at it. A "regular user" wanting to run Fedora on their Pi > is going to go to the Fedora ARM landing page[0]. That page doesn't make > it immediately clear what works on what hardware. If the user doesn't > give up, they may scroll down and see the Documentation link and follow > it to the Fedora ARM wiki page[1]. Scrolling there they will see > "Supported Hardware and Devices" with "Raspberry Pi" right on top. That > page[2] repeatedly lists Workstation as supported on the 3B+, in the > introduction, under supported hardware, under pre-requestites (where a > video cable is suggested, implying something other than minimal should > work), and as explicitly under supported images. No caveats are given. > > End rant. I really am appreciative of Fedora on ARM. Thanks for listening. Maybe if you'd bought this up in an appropriate place, such as the arm mailing list or the weekly meeting we could address it, or maybe just ask the status and people's thoughts on IRC and see what the status is and whether it makes sense to updating the documentation for these devices and then volunteering to do it for the arm team? Peter ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
Thanks for following up. I was mostly trying to gauge if this was common enough it should be a proposed blocker. Now, not to be a stick in the mud, but what other common armhfp hardware is out there? If the Pi 3B+ isn't "up to the task", perhaps desktop images that aren't expected work should just be dropped? I'm not sure a desktop environment running on armhfp in a VM is that common of a use case. We're now looking at publicly releasing a version of Fedora that apparently just doesn't work when all immediately obvious documentation implies it should. This brings up my major frustration with Fedora on ARM since I've started poking at it. A "regular user" wanting to run Fedora on their Pi is going to go to the Fedora ARM landing page[0]. That page doesn't make it immediately clear what works on what hardware. If the user doesn't give up, they may scroll down and see the Documentation link and follow it to the Fedora ARM wiki page[1]. Scrolling there they will see "Supported Hardware and Devices" with "Raspberry Pi" right on top. That page[2] repeatedly lists Workstation as supported on the 3B+, in the introduction, under supported hardware, under pre-requestites (where a video cable is suggested, implying something other than minimal should work), and as explicitly under supported images. No caveats are given. End rant. I really am appreciative of Fedora on ARM. Thanks for listening. [0] - https://arm.fedoraproject.org/ [1] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM [2] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Raspberry_Pi On 4/22/21 8:02 PM, Paul Whalen wrote: - Original Message - Can anyone successfully boot a Workstation image on a Raspberry Pi 3B+? I keep running into a segfault[0][1] with both armhfp and aarch64 images. Hi Brandon, Thanks for testing and filing those bugs. Unfortunately the Raspberry Pi 3 hasn't quite been up to the task for a while. Workstation needs a minimum of 2GB in my testing- even then it struggles. Join us on the arm mailing list[1], you'll likely get a quicker response to arm related questions. Thanks, Paul [1] - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm.lists.fedoraproject.org/ [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950129 [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950171 ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
- Original Message - > Can anyone successfully boot a Workstation image on a Raspberry Pi 3B+? > I keep running into a segfault[0][1] with both armhfp and aarch64 images. Hi Brandon, Thanks for testing and filing those bugs. Unfortunately the Raspberry Pi 3 hasn't quite been up to the task for a while. Workstation needs a minimum of 2GB in my testing- even then it struggles. Join us on the arm mailing list[1], you'll likely get a quicker response to arm related questions. Thanks, Paul [1] - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/arm.lists.fedoraproject.org/ > > [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950129 > [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950171 > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
gdm / gnome-shell segfaults on Raspberry Pi 3B+
Can anyone successfully boot a Workstation image on a Raspberry Pi 3B+? I keep running into a segfault[0][1] with both armhfp and aarch64 images. [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950129 [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950171 ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
