[i686] Next steps

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[i686] Next steps

Bartłomiej Piotrowski-3
Hi everyone,

sorry for writing so late but there is limit of things I can accomplish
every day and that list always includes some cat pictures.

As you are most likely aware, I recently announced the deprecation of
i686 support. However I would like this to turn out into a second tier
architecture.

I can imagine that there is no need for huge team of packagers; as i686
isn't very different from x86_64, it will be mostly "catch up" game
against base distribution (Arch). ARM team already did this work[1] so
it's mostly about setting it up with few build servers. ARM port also
maintains a separate git repository with modified PKGBUILDs that
wouldn't otherwise build on ARM. I'd probably consider targeting i486 or
i586 instead to include more old hardware. i686 misses the fanciest
features anyway.

So these are my 5 cents. I keep an eye on the mailing list and will try
to reply in timely manner to any questions.

Bartłomiej

[1] http://github.com/archlinuxarm
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Erich Eckner
Hi list,

I'd propose the following steps - open for discussion and as you might
notice more vague towards the end:

preparations:
- choose a name (my suggestion: archlinux32)
- set up / use some git hosting (e.g. github) for maintenance of
build-system, website, package-source-trees (there are two from
archlinux.org: svntogit/community.git and svntogit/packages.git?),
possibly our own packages (e.g. archlinux32-keyring?)
- clone, understand and modify archlinuxarm's plugbuild (does this have
some sort of documentation? - sry, I'm quite new to perl)

testing:
- set up build-clients (do they need to run i486/i586/i686 or can we
cross compile from x86_64?)
- compile, install, test packages
- keep this up in parallel to official archlinux.org's i686 (so we have
a sane benchmark and/or fallback)

production:
- hopefully change nothing but references in /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist on
production systems ;-)

As Bartłomiej pointed out, it would be nice to have i486 and i586
supported, too (*yay*, I finally can run arch on my router!). This
shouldn't be a big deal if we really use archlinuxarm's plugbuild - they
support compiling for multiple different architectures anyway.

One thing I have no clue of, is how the isos are created. But probably
it's straight forward if we have some system running on archlinux32 and
installed "archiso".

regards,
Erich

On 30.01.2017 23:42, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> sorry for writing so late but there is limit of things I can accomplish
> every day and that list always includes some cat pictures.
>
> As you are most likely aware, I recently announced the deprecation of
> i686 support. However I would like this to turn out into a second tier
> architecture.
>
> I can imagine that there is no need for huge team of packagers; as i686
> isn't very different from x86_64, it will be mostly "catch up" game
> against base distribution (Arch). ARM team already did this work[1] so
> it's mostly about setting it up with few build servers. ARM port also
> maintains a separate git repository with modified PKGBUILDs that
> wouldn't otherwise build on ARM. I'd probably consider targeting i486 or
> i586 instead to include more old hardware. i686 misses the fanciest
> features anyway.
>
> So these are my 5 cents. I keep an eye on the mailing list and will try
> to reply in timely manner to any questions.
>
> Bartłomiej
>
> [1] http://github.com/archlinuxarm
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
>
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Erich Eckner
Hi all,

we took a step forward and now we have:

- a name: archlinux32
- a domain: archlinux32.org
- a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32

If you feel, you have anything[1] to contribute, please send me an email
with your account name on github.com and I'll invite you to the
organization, so we can brainstorm and sort out details.

regards,
Erich

1] some inspirations what might be needed: code, packagers, maintainers,
testers, infrastucture (server, computation power), artwork, ...
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Félix
Hi everyone,

Le 1 févr. 2017 à 22:18, Erich Eckner <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> we took a step forward and now we have:
> - a name: archlinux32
> - a domain: archlinux32.org
> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32

How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
I've nothing against though.

> If you feel, you have anything[1] to contribute, please send me an email
> with your account name on github.com and I'll invite you to the
> organization,

I'd like very much to participate as a maintainer, tester and infrastructure
provider (if needed) as I have various i686 machines running arch, but I
don't have any github account, and I'm not particularly thrilled about
creating one for that.

Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
closer to Arch dev's one ?

> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.

Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?

My 2 cents…

----
Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355


_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports

signature.asc (507 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Erich Eckner
Hi list,

On 01.02.2017 23:02, Félix Faisant wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Le 1 févr. 2017 à 22:18, Erich Eckner <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
>> we took a step forward and now we have:
>> - a name: archlinux32
>> - a domain: archlinux32.org
>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
>
> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
> I've nothing against though.

I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this
has to be final.

>
>> If you feel, you have anything[1] to contribute, please send me an email
>> with your account name on github.com and I'll invite you to the
>> organization,
>
> I'd like very much to participate as a maintainer, tester and infrastructure
> provider (if needed) as I have various i686 machines running arch, but I
> don't have any github account, and I'm not particularly thrilled about
> creating one for that.
>
> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
> closer to Arch dev's one ?

archlinuxarm is maintained via github - this gave the idea. However,
from a personal point I can understand the hesitation to create a github
account. :-)
In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally
disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for
tickets, discussions, and the like.
Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make
more sense to copy from them.

>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
>
> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?

true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have
a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't
we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for
that - at least to start with. Or with other words: City-busz just put a
proposal for a build-system on:
https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system
(it's readable for anyone, I hope)

>
> My 2 cents…

They're welcome.

>
> ----
> Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355

regards,
Erich
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Félix
Hi list,

Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <[hidden email]> a écrit :

>>> we took a step forward and now we have:
>>> - a name: archlinux32
>>> - a domain: archlinux32.org
>>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
>>
>> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
>> I've nothing against though.
>
> I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this
> has to be final.
Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people
to give their opinion before going further.

>> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
>> closer to Arch dev's one ?
>
> In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally
> disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for
> tickets, discussions, and the like.

Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain.
I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be
appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github
so I can't tell.

> Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make
> more sense to copy from them.

Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with
Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...

>>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
>>
>> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
>
> true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have
> a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't
> we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for
> that - at least to start with.

I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that,
but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than
a detailed one.

> Or with other words: City-busz just put a
> proposal for a build-system on:
> https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system
> (it's readable for anyone, I hope)

Great. Seems good for me.
Could we precise the signing strategy ?

Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent
one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency
on builds ?

Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?

----
Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355


_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports

signature.asc (507 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Petras Petunov
Hello everybody,

I hope I can contribute somehow too. I have one i686 machine running
Arch, but I think it would be easier to test on a VM. And I don't mind
if you decide to use github or something else.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Félix Faisant <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi list,
>
> Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
>>>> we took a step forward and now we have:
>>>> - a name: archlinux32
>>>> - a domain: archlinux32.org
>>>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
>>>
>>> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
>>> I've nothing against though.
>>
>> I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this
>> has to be final.
>
> Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people
> to give their opinion before going further.
>
>>> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
>>> closer to Arch dev's one ?
>>
>> In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally
>> disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for
>> tickets, discussions, and the like.
>
> Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain.
> I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be
> appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github
> so I can't tell.
>
>> Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make
>> more sense to copy from them.
>
> Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with
> Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...
>
>>>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
>>>
>>> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
>>
>> true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have
>> a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't
>> we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for
>> that - at least to start with.
>
> I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that,
> but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than
> a detailed one.
>
>> Or with other words: City-busz just put a
>> proposal for a build-system on:
>> https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system
>> (it's readable for anyone, I hope)
>
> Great. Seems good for me.
> Could we precise the signing strategy ?
>
> Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent
> one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency
> on builds ?
>
> Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?
>
> ----
> Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Polichronucci
In reply to this post by Félix
Hello list,

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:51:35AM +0100, Félix Faisant wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> >>> we took a step forward and now we have:
> >>> - a name: archlinux32
> >>> - a domain: archlinux32.org
> >>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
> >>>
I thought of the same name so obviously I agree on that.

> >>
> >> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
> >> I've nothing against though.
> >
> > I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this
> > has to be final.
>
> Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people
> to give their opinion before going further.
>
Giving people some time is essential in opinion for a community project
to function. But again its nice to see people take initiative.

>
> >> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
> >> closer to Arch dev's one ?
> >
> > In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally
> > disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for
> > tickets, discussions, and the like.
>
> Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain.
> I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be
> appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github
> so I can't tell.
>
I have no problem at all for using GitHub. We could also set up a
private GitLab somewhere. Since the GitHub organisation is already setup
I would go with that.
>
> > Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make
> > more sense to copy from them.
>
> Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with
> Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...
>
ArchLinuxARM is a good place to get ideas on how to get this project
going, but the PKGBUILDs and the tools as already mentioned above will
be close to the Arch way.

>
> >>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
> >>
> >> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
> >
> > true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have
> > a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't
> > we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for
> > that - at least to start with.
>
> I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that,
> but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than
> a detailed one.
>
I agree. We should mainly use the list so everybody can follow. IRC is
good as well but no archive, so its better for problem solving that
actual planning.

>
> > Or with other words: City-busz just put a
> > proposal for a build-system on:
> > https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system
> > (it's readable for anyone, I hope)
>
> Great. Seems good for me.
> Could we precise the signing strategy ?
>
> Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent
> one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency
> on builds ?
>
> Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?
>
From the official Arch ones? Yes, that's what I picked up.

--
[hidden email]
GPG: 0x7E8A06A6C80574E4
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Polichronucci
In reply to this post by Erich Eckner
Hi list,

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:18:34PM +0100, Erich Eckner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we took a step forward and now we have:
>
> - a name: archlinux32
> - a domain: archlinux32.org
> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
>
After some discussion on the IRC we setup archlinux32.org to point to a
VPS of mine. I setup a basic NginX and a web-page [1]. I added a logo
which is really simple since I'm not good whith graphics. I like the
idea though, old retro looking pixeled logo (maybe even the whole logo
pixeled).

Check it out and let me know what you think of it.

[1] - http://archlinux32.org

--
[hidden email]
GPG: 0x7E8A06A6C80574E4
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [i686] Next steps

Martyn Yates
Hi Polichronucci

Yes  I like it.  Good to see things are moving along.

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 03:05:37 +0200
Polichronucci <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi list,
>
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 10:18:34PM +0100, Erich Eckner wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > we took a step forward and now we have:
> >
> > - a name: archlinux32
> > - a domain: archlinux32.org
> > - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
> >  
> After some discussion on the IRC we setup archlinux32.org to point to a
> VPS of mine. I setup a basic NginX and a web-page [1]. I added a logo
> which is really simple since I'm not good whith graphics. I like the
> idea though, old retro looking pixeled logo (maybe even the whole logo
> pixeled).
>
> Check it out and let me know what you think of it.
>
> [1] - http://archlinux32.org
>
_______________________________________________
arch-ports mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports