From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/30#note_582368302
another
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/30#note_582363024
Trying again.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/30#note_582336789
Dummy message to see if this still hits mailing list.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/46#note_582301236
Resolved with !1117
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_570141957
>
>
>
> David Ward commented:
>
>
> I'm going to open an MR which fixes the text in the SPEC file to
reflect the current behavior, now that I understand the way this flag is
meant to be used, and
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_569309561
I'm going to open an MR which fixes the text in the SPEC file to reflect
the current behavior, now that I understand the way this flag is meant
to be used, and let that close this issue.
I believe
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_569300704
Yes, I meant this to close this.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/40#note_569264346
Works for me.
Cheers,
Don
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/40#note_569259804
I was waiting until the merge window closes to do the Fedora configs,
which would properly test this. Either close it, and I can reopen if it
doesn't, or I will close the issue once I have done
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_569259385
I thought this was fixed with MR https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-
ark/-/merge_requests/1061
___
kernel mailing list --
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_569256340
@dpward @jmflinuxtx - did the two of you agreed to a path forward?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/40#note_569255302
@jmflinuxtx - i think my MR earlier this week addresses your example?
If so, can we close this an open a new issue when a new example shows
up?
___
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_569254855
@dpward @jmflinuxtx - do we have an agreed solution here?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/48#note_567145528
Wait just a minute on that, there is a filter issue with the surface
modules merge. I am testing a fix, but your x86_64 build will fail until
I get that pushed.
From: John Villalovos on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/48#note_567132410
Thanks! I was thinking I was making a mistake in my build.
I'll try again with x86_64 and see if my build system can build that.
___
kernel mailing
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/48#note_567130107
No, it is not, the issue came up a while ago in Linux next, and they
fixed it for everything but aarch64. I have brought it up with upstream
maintainers and was told:
> the fix is being worked
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/47#note_567069865
Did a test build with # CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF is not set, this is not
the problem, I get the same output.
___
kernel mailing list --
From: Herton R. Krzesinski on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/46#note_566395197
In the case of sctp, sctp_diag is on kernel-modules and is pulling sctp
back to it. The fix is to add sctp_diag to the mod-extra.list.
In the case of the l2tp* modules, the l2tp_ip6 is
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/45#note_566062987
Of note, the commit log from 8da650b56e4fec39041edc15f2c328e2b7d29717:
> A few more fixes for local builds. None of this works until .1
Until I have tagged and pushed kernel-5.12.1-0, do not
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/45#note_566036154
Tags are there, I never did a tag push because I hadn't gotten that far
in the release yet for 5.12.1 and 5.11.18 builds. I changed my sync
script to push them when I pull from greg though.
From: Julian Sikorski on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/45#note_566019053
`git remote add stable
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git && git
fetch stable` allows to work this issue around.
___
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/44#note_565170086
This was fixed with f23ad26468fce25011739cf9980761ef81483c43 Sorry, was
getting to it, today's build was broken in multiple ways, and I have
been workign through them.
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562688620
> We can't use the exact moment [...] It could be that date I suppose.
Though there is nothing there that guarantees it matches what was
tagged.
This is what I meant. I'd like to create a MR that
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562665828
Of note, I think the reason this does not exist, and no one has cared to
put in the effort, is because dist-git is still considered the canonical
source of truth for Fedora builds, and if you
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562648033
> We want to use this exact moment as the date in the NVR. But, I
believe we should read that from the commit date for that tag, not from
the shell script checking the system clock after it has
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562616785
Focusing on this part:
> The tag in the kernel-ark tree is placed on the commit used in os-
build to make that release, and the date is the date at which the make
release was tagged.
We want to
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562593935
Koji has nothing to do with the date tag in the n-v-r, the date tag is
when 'make release' was run, which may not be the same date that release
is pushed to dist-git with 'make dist-git', and
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_562573307
I think I lumped too many different things together, and I'd like to
focus on just one question that is important to me.
If someone checks out a specific tag in kernel-ark (which in turn
From: Denis Efremov on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/41#note_557826775
Thank you for your help. I faced that there is no tag for kernel-5.11.2
release (kernel-5.11.2-300.fc34.src.rpm).
```
$ git tag | grep kernel-5.11.\[123\]-
kernel-5.11.1-2
kernel-5.11.3-5
```
If
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/43#note_555971912
Fixed with https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-
ark/-/commit/8691fd224224aa9aecce9ad2105e4b0828f5cd8d
___
kernel mailing list --
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555188897
> `kernel` and `kernel-debug` are both just metapackages.
>
> When `%{debugbuildsenabled}` is 0, can we still produce a `kernel-
debug` metapackage?
This would be a possible solution. Don't
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555185290
It is not a use case that has an easy solution within the confines of
rpm/dnf right now, though the simple way to do it would be to write up
repo builder script that grabs the latest build daily
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555184424
`kernel` and `kernel-debug` are both just metapackages.
When `%{debugbuildsenabled}` is 0, can we still produce a `kernel-debug`
metapackage?
___
kernel
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555122607
What about users who only want to install debug kernels, and want to
stay up-to-date with the latest build (regardless of whether it is a
snapshot and release)? Is there a way to do that
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555112975
> Ok, that's what I had assumed. Can we make the naming consistent
though, while still accomplishing that?
The naming is inline with package guidelines. rcX releases are in fact
upstream
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555101078
Ok, that's what I had assumed. Can we make the naming consistent though,
while still accomplishing that?
I'm suggesting we build non-releases using `--with-dbgonly`. Then either
we:
- follow the
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/42#note_555069659
The reason that this is set is because there is overhead in running
debug builds. We have a whole lot of users willing to run a rawhide
kernel for day to day, and the testing we get from that is
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/41#note_551800150
Just as an update, for a quick temp fix, I modified the fedora-5.11 tree
to always set it to 0, and I can manually bump it if I end up doing a
second build for any reason. Better solution to
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/41#note_550951201
> This would be handy. Because, otherwise I can't determine a tagname
automatically based only on a "package-version" name. Currently, I need
first to grep all available tags for kernel-5.11.13,
From: Denis Efremov on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/41#note_550926292
> I suppose we could reset that number with every version bump so that
it would match the last digit of BUILD always.
This would be handy. Because, otherwise I can't determine a tagname
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/41#note_550913432
There are a couple of things here:
> Fedora RPM tagging in the ARK kernel began in May 2020 for fc33.
This line is not entirely accurate, as ARK was only used for Rawhide
from May of 2020
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/40#note_548390887
Two more odd observations about the error. First, I closed all of those
MRs yestrday, and when the script ran again, it just recreated them,
even though there should be no config issues (files
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547946553
It is an important distinction that the typical package has an upstream
source repository, and dist-git. We have essentially 2 different
upstream repositories and dist-git, so having the date
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547944992
kernel-5.11.0-155
kernel-5.11.0-156
kernel-5.11.0-157
kernel-5.11.0-158
These are tags by an autogenerated by scripts and have nothing to do
with dist-git because most of them were not used.
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547939066
Sorry if I am misunderstanding something. I was saying that for
`kernel-5.12.0-0.rc6.20210408git454859c5.186` we should make the date
(`20210408`) correspond to the upstream commit (`454859c5`). If
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547885204
https://www.kernel.org/ for reference.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547881033
rc releases such as kernel-5.12.0-0.rc6.184 are built as release kernels
which is why they differ. It is an actual upstream release.
___
kernel
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547864291
We can't rely on that, because a date is only used for snapshotting.
`kernel-5.12.0-0.rc6.184` does not have a date in it, but everything you
mentioned still applies; you could rebuild the same
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547745411
Date in this case is very much important and different in that the git
commit there is the upstream (Linus tree) commit, and not the kernel-ark
commit id. Date gives us a bit more information as
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547733607
My guess would be that the script would already have become confused at
this point, given that `` was added.
Related to ``: it contains the date that the [RPM source files
are
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547725975
The decision to drop `` to 1 was made after 5.12 started as the
numbers are climbing inconsistently with what we want. Realistically
100/200/300 have special meaning for Fedora stable releases,
From: David Ward on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547716096
I agree this is outside of Fedora here (although the NVR is not being
changed for Rawhide, which is a different matter).
I wanted to clarify: in the example above, you would have `Release:
From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547598365
As a prerelease kernel, we have never relied on for ordering, nor
should we. This is not a valid 5.12 release. 5.12.0-1 should supercede
it. I will say that the release bump is not entirely
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/24#note_540248405
Closing as no kernel package owns that directory.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/28#note_535167940
Closing this out and we settled on a compromise solution for now.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/25#note_535167332
closing as merged
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/24#note_535166635
@jmflinuxtx - i assume we still need this change for out-of-tree drivers
that install in 'extras' even if kernel-module-extras is not installed?
___
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/22#note_535165867
Closing as I think this is addressed now
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/21#note_535165611
@jmflinuxtx - do we still need this or can we drop it from the spec
file?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/20#note_535165126
Closing as this is properly caught with a config update trigger a new CI
pipeline.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/19#note_535164553
Closing as we went in a different direction.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/12#note_535164230
Closing as this is done.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/8#note_535163819
Closing as merged.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/6#note_535163575
Closing this out. A bunch of these docs are there. Not all though.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/2#note_535161266
Closing this. It is a known issue but I can't find anyone who has time
to pursue it.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
From: grsm2020 on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/38#note_533799613
@dzickusrh Thanks!
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/38#note_533778704
@grsm2020 - can you open a bug at bugzilla.redhat.com for this? These
gitlab issues are mainly to track workflow problems. You actually have
a kernel issue which is tracked by bugzilla.
-Don
From: Nicolas Chauvet on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/37#note_483827197
Wrong bug tracker.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:23:11PM -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of bcrocker
wrote:
> From: bcrocker on gitlab.com
>
> Add a GIT macro to Makefile:
>
> GIT ?= git
>
> and replace literal occurrences of 'git' with $(GIT)\
> in Makefile and Makefile.common.
Acked-by: Don Zickus
>
> This
On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 14:25:21 -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of Ben Crocker
wrote:
> I made the change you suggested; thanks!
Thanks!
Acked-by: Jiri Benc
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:23:11PM -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of bcrocker
wrote:
> From: bcrocker on gitlab.com
>
> Add a GIT macro to Makefile:
>
> GIT ?= git
>
> and replace literal occurrences of 'git' with $(GIT)\
> in Makefile and Makefile.common.
>
> This change enables us to
From: Ben Crocker on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/670#note_460701437
Jiri,
I made the change you suggested; thanks!
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
72 matches
Mail list logo
