Arm-dev

arm-dev@lists.centos.org

1 participants
688 discussions

Cross Compiling vs Native Compiling
by Mandar Joshi 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

Hello everybody, This part is mentioned in my GSoC proposal but I thought I should bring it up here as well. How do you feel about taking a slightly different approach to ARM development? Viz. Cross Compiling. We could use existing infrastructure x86,x86_64 servers to build packages for ARMv7. This will require writing some plugins for Yum, Mock & Koji based on work done by msalter from RedHat. I am referring to this post https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-buildsys-list/2009-July/msg00000.html The way I see it, cross compiling will get packages compiled faster and would be easy to setup. We won't have to rely of ARM Hardware from online.net A thing to ponder over is whether this fits in the CentOS policy. Regards Mandar Joshi

4 5

5 armv7 nodes available from online.net
by Fabian Arrotin 11 Apr '15

11 Apr '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi guys, Just to let you know that people from http://labs.online.net/ are "sponsoring" a centos account on their ARM cloud setup and we currently have 5 nodes with the following specs : - - 4-cores ARMv7 CPU : ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v7l), Marvell Armada 370/XP (Device Tree) - - 2GB of RAM - - 1 Gbit/s network link - - 50GB local storage (seems to be in fact a ndb device served from a storage node using SSD disks) The nodes are installed with their Fedora 21 custom image. We're all busy with the CentOS 7 (tag 1503) rebuild and QA tests, but we'd have to discuss the best way to use those armv7 nodes. I'll also try to see what would be the best option for a central storage, but probably nfs is the only option, or iscsi lun served from one of those nodes, acting as both the admin node and jump host (only one public/reserved IP in our current account, but we can then reach the other nodes, so not a real issue) Thanks to Online.net for that account ! - -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlUUCuEACgkQnVkHo1a+xU47LgCfVbGVuIvSj59aBeWGcW4ARGi1 lEIAni+Ah+LnuspY2Db2hoBGbD1sRGey =j876 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

How will we test
by Robert Moskowitz 26 Mar '15

26 Mar '15

Unfortunately, I know have REAL work paying me to spend time on their contract. But I have not booked all of my time... I have a couple of Cubies: Cubieboard2 and Cubietruck. I am trying to get a couple more HDD drives cheap to test with as well. How will we test? Will we be downloading xzcat images like Fedora does from koji? Will there be a more 'classic' anaconda installer from a DVD or Netinstall from a repo? For a repo, I can rsync the repo(s) to my net for testing. I do this right now for a number of Fedora and Centos versions. It is great that progress is going on somewhere. I hope that the uboot is more current than F21 (which only supports headless on the Allwinner SOC) and also a more recent kernel that supports the functions in the current uboot.

1 0

Re: [Arm-dev] Latest rhel7 nss and nss-softokn won't build on arm
by Jacco Ligthart 11 Mar '15

11 Mar '15

Troy, please have a look at my patches for this: http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7/alpha/patches/… http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7/alpha/patches/… Jacco On Wednesday, 11 March, 2015 15:43 CET, Troy Dawson <yortnoswad(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > Just giving you a heads up about this bug. > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200856 > > Since it's only for the latest errata release on RHEL7, you might not hit > it for a while, depending on how you are doing your build. > > Troy > p.s. Solution is in the bugzilla, as well as the problem.

2 1

Latest rhel7 nss and nss-softokn won't build on arm
by Troy Dawson 11 Mar '15

11 Mar '15

Hi, Just giving you a heads up about this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200856 Since it's only for the latest errata release on RHEL7, you might not hit it for a while, depending on how you are doing your build. Troy p.s. Solution is in the bugzilla, as well as the problem.

1 0

Status for aarch64 builds
by Jim Perrin 10 Mar '15

10 Mar '15

Here's where things are for aarch64/ARMv8 currently. http://seven.centos.org/2015/03/building-centos-linux-7-for-armv8/ -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

2 1

Current F22 uboot/kernel supports sata boot
by Robert Moskowitz 03 Mar '15

03 Mar '15

Kind of; for those devices with sata. You still have to have uboot on the SD card; at some point in the future you will be able to copy it to NAND. So I have modified the installer script to support this; having the small SD card and the sata drive mounted together on your host system for the build step. I have sent my mods in. Just one more step down the road of making this 'easy' for use. Will always need the SD card for firstboot, then some step to copy it to NAND for future boots. I was having some problems at first and saw some intersesting messages on the serial console. Thus I would not be supprised if USB boot would work just as well. I will try that next week with an IDE drive on a USB adapter.

1 1

Re: [Arm-dev] Work in progress ARM v7 port
by Jacco Ligthart 22 Feb '15

22 Feb '15

Hi Howard, As Gordan noted before, I did more ore less the same but then for armv5. As of today the result of that can be found here: http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7/ It might be interesting for you to have a look at the things that required patching or other "special" treatment for mock building. I tried to summarize that all here: http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7/alpha/RS7_issu… (the patches are all here: http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7/alpha/patches/ ) What I wanted is to have RHEL7/CentOS7 to run on the Raspberry Pi model 1 (there was no model 2 when I started) After discussion with Gordan I went for armv5 in stead of armv6, so it would work for more arm devices. > Hello all. Recently I've been having a bit of fun trying to port CentOS > 7 to ARMv7, and I thought I'd share info on what I've been doing with > the list. > > As a long-time Red Hat family distribution user, I've been interested in > a CentOS build for ARM since the release of the originally Raspberry > Pi. However, it's only with the release of RHEL 7 that a source code > base that largely works on ARM has been available to CentOS [1]. The > announcement and release of the new, faster, quad-core ARMv7-based > Raspberry Pi 2 sounded like an ideal reason to have a go at making a > CentOS-like RHEL rebuild for ARM, so I ordered a couple of Pi 2s, and > started having a think about how I'd go about building EL7. > > Having been on the periphery of the CentOS project for quite a while, I > knew how CentOS 7 was built: the RHEL 7 sources were rebuilt multiple > times; first against the public RHEL 7 beta, then against the results of > this build, then against then those results, and so on. Ideally, a > similar process could be used to built EL7 for ARM, but of course there > has never been a RHEL 7 release for ARM of any sort. Fortunately, > Fedora 19, which RHEL 7 was forked from, does have a public (and > functional) ARM release. So an EL7 ARM port can be bootstrapped from > the Fedora binary RPMs. My build was bootstrapped from the armv5 build of F18 And exactly as you explained, all rpms have been build (at least) twice. Once against F18 (or a combination of F18 and RSEL7) and after that once against the result of that. > Of course, before I could start rebuilding CentOS sources, I'd need an > OS image to rebuild on. Fortunately, the Raspberry Pi's bootloader > system is pretty simple: the Pi's firmware looks for specifically named > files in the VFAT-formatted first partition of the SD card. The Fedora > 19 Minimal image has an ext4 /boot partition which is easily > reformatted, and populated with the contents of /boot from the Pi 2 > Rasbian image, and the kernel modules to go with the Rasbian-shipped > kernel copied to the ext4 / filesystem. A quick (not really) dd of the > image to an SD card, and I had a booting Pi 2. The next step was to > test out running mock to build Fedora 19 chroots ready to build packages > in. Testing showed that it took the Pi roughly 8m30s to create a basic > F19 mock chroot on the SD card. > > At the same time as starting out working with the Pi 2, a friend pointed > me at the ODROID C1 [2], a Pi-like small ARM board. The C1 has a couple > of advantages over even the Pi 2: it has a somewhat faster CPU [3], but, > more importantly, it has on-SoC gigabit ethernet [4]. The ODROID is > designed and manufactured by Hardkernel in South Korea. The ODROID is a > bit more expensive (£33 from a UK supplier [5] versus the £25 Pi 2), but > still quite affordable. Realising that building RPMs on a Pi on the SD > card or over the network would be very slow, I ordered a C1 to try. I also took refuge to Odroid after discovering that buildtimes on a Pi1 would seriously hamper this undertaking. I bought an Odroid U3, because this was the cheapest quadcore ARM with 2GB of mem. And my guess is that lots of memory will speedup the build quite a lot. > I was really rather pleased with the C1 when it arrived. After trying > and failing to modify the Fedora 19 ARM Minimal image with an > ODROID-specific kernel [6], I ended up grabbing an F21 image made by one > of the ODROID forum members [7]. The (one of the) nice thing(s) about > building RPMs in mock is that as long as the host OS can run mock, it > doesn't really matter what the host OS is, so a Fedora 21 OS for the C1s > is fine. > > Of course, even the ODROID wouldn't be able to make mock chroots very > quickly on their SD card, but the built-in gigabit ethernet makes > another option quite sensible: iSCSI. By mounting a block device [8] > from a server over iSCSI, the C1 can create an F19 chroot in about > 2m40s. Having decided the C1 was better for the builder job than the Pi > 2, I borrowed another C1 from my friend, and put an order in for two more. I took the easy way. I bought an external USB drive. The SD is now only used for '/boot'. '/' is on the USB disk. > In the meantime, I made a start on building packages using the C1. The > sensible starting point was building the C7 versions of the packages > that go into the basic mock build chroot. The basic idea here is that > the sooner that the set of packages used to build all packages is > replaced with the C7 versions, the closer the OS will be to a "true" C7 > OS [9]. Once this base set was built, the order of the remaining 1000+ > SRPMs is a bit less critical, and more at the mercy of my random whims > [10]. I should also note that I'm concentrating on building the CentOS > 7 GA package set, not any of the updates. Once I have a C7 GA package > set I'm happy with, then I'll look at all the package updates from GA to > current. I also first build everything in the "build-sys" group (against F18). I thought (wrongly) that having this would mean I could build the rest without further help from F18. It does not work that way, there are numerous circular references in the build dependencies. There are even a lot of packages that depend on themselves :( If I would do it again I would first build *everything* against F18 (or better yet F19) and after that do it all again against itself. Your choice for GA has pro's and con's: - some packages won't build because they have a time-constraint. java comes to mind, which will complain about the change of the turkish currency is more than 10 years ago, but I've seen similar things for outdated certificates in the srpm, etc - other packages FTBFS when build against newer packages than GA. I think I had 5 packages that don't build with the latest java. > I was originally planning to knock up a script or two to wrap mock and > do createrepo runs. Instead I decided to dust off Plague, the old build > system Seth Vidal and co wrote for Fedora Extras. Plague takes care of > managing a queue of SRPMs to distribute to multiple builders, running > builds, collecting resulting logs and RPMs, and making yum repos. > Plague is a tad old, and needed a few code changes to support ARM > architectures. It's also a bit... tempremental at times, as the central > manager process has issues spotting when builders come and go, but > overall it's done quite well. > > So what's the current status of the rebuild effort? Of the 2481 SRPMs > in CentOS 7.0.1406 (the GA C7 release), 1125 don't need to be rebuilt > for ARM, either because they're entirely noarch packages [11], or > because they're listed as either "exclusivearch", which means they > should only be built on a specific list of architectures [12]. Of the > remaining 1356 packages, 943 have been successfully rebuilt, 62 have > failed to build, and 351 haven't been attempted yet. Thus far only two > RPMs have needed to be modified: centos-release had to be altered to not > conflict with the Fedora 19 systemd (both packages contain > /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset), but is now replaced > with the stock C7 version, and elfutils has had its test suite disabled > [13]. Very much on the positive side, after a 36 hour build, the third > build attempt of libreoffice completed successfully [14]. I found that I often do want to build the exclusivearch packages. They are sometimes needed for dependencies, or are just perfectly good packages for arm. I also sometimes disable the testsuites, but elfutils is not one of them. > The other thing that's worth saying is that I've not yet looked at any > ARM-specific "special" stuff, like an ARM kernel build, or any > bootloader support. That's potentially hard stuff, and will take some > thinking about [15]. I made the kernel build (even the latest version, which was more of a challenge), but till now I've only used the headers for building other packages. I think my kernel srpm patch can be used to build a perfectly working arm kernel *if you have the right .config* I noticed that both the raspberrypi and the odroid have quite some patches against the standard kernel and I don't think it is worth it to try and merge that to RH's kernel. I think I should put this a bit stronger: I don't trust RH to make a good basis for an ARM kernel. A good example is that one of the patches they did against the kernel "missed" the arm part of the patch (resulting in FTBFS). The original patch I saw *did* have the ARM part, so RH must have removed that somewhere. Point is that if you're not a kernel hacker it will be damn difficult to assess if the fixes they did to the kernel are present in your ARM build, etc. In the end I just package the pre-compiled stuff from raspberry/odroid Good luck on your endeavor and feel free to ask if you need any help. Jacco

2 2

Booting from sata
by Robert Moskowitz 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

I noticed in a recent post to the u-boot list that Hans said that booting from sata now works with the latest upstream uboot and 3.19 kernel. So I asked him to clearify and he said that you still need the SD card, but just for the uboot. ALL partitions can go on your sata drive. I further suspect that even I can figure out how to get the uboot to NAND, so that no SD card is needed. This might even be able to be implemented in an install script that a lot of users can deal with. And that is where we get past crawling to walking. When you run a script, only providing the location of the .xz file and your board, and the install goes. Well at least to the part where you have a bootable drive to install into your system.

1 1

Work in progress ARM v7 port
by Howard Johnson 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hello all. Recently I've been having a bit of fun trying to port CentOS 7 to ARMv7, and I thought I'd share info on what I've been doing with the list. As a long-time Red Hat family distribution user, I've been interested in a CentOS build for ARM since the release of the originally Raspberry Pi. However, it's only with the release of RHEL 7 that a source code base that largely works on ARM has been available to CentOS [1]. The announcement and release of the new, faster, quad-core ARMv7-based Raspberry Pi 2 sounded like an ideal reason to have a go at making a CentOS-like RHEL rebuild for ARM, so I ordered a couple of Pi 2s, and started having a think about how I'd go about building EL7. Having been on the periphery of the CentOS project for quite a while, I knew how CentOS 7 was built: the RHEL 7 sources were rebuilt multiple times; first against the public RHEL 7 beta, then against the results of this build, then against then those results, and so on. Ideally, a similar process could be used to built EL7 for ARM, but of course there has never been a RHEL 7 release for ARM of any sort. Fortunately, Fedora 19, which RHEL 7 was forked from, does have a public (and functional) ARM release. So an EL7 ARM port can be bootstrapped from the Fedora binary RPMs. Of course, before I could start rebuilding CentOS sources, I'd need an OS image to rebuild on. Fortunately, the Raspberry Pi's bootloader system is pretty simple: the Pi's firmware looks for specifically named files in the VFAT-formatted first partition of the SD card. The Fedora 19 Minimal image has an ext4 /boot partition which is easily reformatted, and populated with the contents of /boot from the Pi 2 Rasbian image, and the kernel modules to go with the Rasbian-shipped kernel copied to the ext4 / filesystem. A quick (not really) dd of the image to an SD card, and I had a booting Pi 2. The next step was to test out running mock to build Fedora 19 chroots ready to build packages in. Testing showed that it took the Pi roughly 8m30s to create a basic F19 mock chroot on the SD card. At the same time as starting out working with the Pi 2, a friend pointed me at the ODROID C1 [2], a Pi-like small ARM board. The C1 has a couple of advantages over even the Pi 2: it has a somewhat faster CPU [3], but, more importantly, it has on-SoC gigabit ethernet [4]. The ODROID is designed and manufactured by Hardkernel in South Korea. The ODROID is a bit more expensive (£33 from a UK supplier [5] versus the £25 Pi 2), but still quite affordable. Realising that building RPMs on a Pi on the SD card or over the network would be very slow, I ordered a C1 to try. I was really rather pleased with the C1 when it arrived. After trying and failing to modify the Fedora 19 ARM Minimal image with an ODROID-specific kernel [6], I ended up grabbing an F21 image made by one of the ODROID forum members [7]. The (one of the) nice thing(s) about building RPMs in mock is that as long as the host OS can run mock, it doesn't really matter what the host OS is, so a Fedora 21 OS for the C1s is fine. Of course, even the ODROID wouldn't be able to make mock chroots very quickly on their SD card, but the built-in gigabit ethernet makes another option quite sensible: iSCSI. By mounting a block device [8] from a server over iSCSI, the C1 can create an F19 chroot in about 2m40s. Having decided the C1 was better for the builder job than the Pi 2, I borrowed another C1 from my friend, and put an order in for two more. In the meantime, I made a start on building packages using the C1. The sensible starting point was building the C7 versions of the packages that go into the basic mock build chroot. The basic idea here is that the sooner that the set of packages used to build all packages is replaced with the C7 versions, the closer the OS will be to a "true" C7 OS [9]. Once this base set was built, the order of the remaining 1000+ SRPMs is a bit less critical, and more at the mercy of my random whims [10]. I should also note that I'm concentrating on building the CentOS 7 GA package set, not any of the updates. Once I have a C7 GA package set I'm happy with, then I'll look at all the package updates from GA to current. I was originally planning to knock up a script or two to wrap mock and do createrepo runs. Instead I decided to dust off Plague, the old build system Seth Vidal and co wrote for Fedora Extras. Plague takes care of managing a queue of SRPMs to distribute to multiple builders, running builds, collecting resulting logs and RPMs, and making yum repos. Plague is a tad old, and needed a few code changes to support ARM architectures. It's also a bit... tempremental at times, as the central manager process has issues spotting when builders come and go, but overall it's done quite well. So what's the current status of the rebuild effort? Of the 2481 SRPMs in CentOS 7.0.1406 (the GA C7 release), 1125 don't need to be rebuilt for ARM, either because they're entirely noarch packages [11], or because they're listed as either "exclusivearch", which means they should only be built on a specific list of architectures [12]. Of the remaining 1356 packages, 943 have been successfully rebuilt, 62 have failed to build, and 351 haven't been attempted yet. Thus far only two RPMs have needed to be modified: centos-release had to be altered to not conflict with the Fedora 19 systemd (both packages contain /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset), but is now replaced with the stock C7 version, and elfutils has had its test suite disabled [13]. Very much on the positive side, after a 36 hour build, the third build attempt of libreoffice completed successfully [14]. The other thing that's worth saying is that I've not yet looked at any ARM-specific "special" stuff, like an ARM kernel build, or any bootloader support. That's potentially hard stuff, and will take some thinking about [15]. I'm planning to put the various hacky scripts I'm using into a github repo or similar, and I'll be posting status updates in the future with how I get on. Cheers! [1] RHEL6's Fedora 12/13-derived codebase largely predates the Fedora ARM effort, whereas the Fedora 19 base of RHEL 7 had an actively maintained ARM secondary architecture; fixes to Fedora packages for ARM were incorporated into Fedora proper, and RHEL 7 inherited these fixes. [2] http://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G141578608433 [3] Four 1.5GHz cores versus the Pi 2's four 900MHz cores. [4] Contrasting with the Pi's fast ethernet adapter wired to the onboard USB hub. [5] http://www.lilliputdirect.com/odroid-c1-quad-core-computer [6] Not helped by me not having bought a serial cable, so I couldn't watch the bootloader messages. [7] http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=114&t=8872 [8] SSD backed, using a Samsung EVO 850 SATA SSD. [9] To the point where it might save an entire OS rebuild cycle, which will be a not inconsiderate amount of effort. [10] For example, one night I queued up all SRPMs with names starting with "lib"; unfortunately I forgot that that would include libreoffice... [11] So we can use the C7 builds unmodified. [12] Packages in this group are generally platform-specific packages like efibootmgr or dmidecode which make no sense on ARMv7 platforms. [13] Due to a single failing test that wasn't run in the Fedora 19 elfutils build. [14] The first died when the C1 ran out of RAM, which made me add iSCSI-backed swap to all the builders, while the second ended when I found that the libreoffice build requires more than 16GB of space; on the bright side I found out that the iSCSI LUNs can be resized entirely online. [15] Apologies for all the footnotes, I like them. -- HJ

7 21

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

Arm-dev