Hi,
I have an interest to keep some i686 hardware running with CentOS 7 installed. However there are some packages in EPEL I need so I am willing to help with maintaning/building the i686 packages for both CentOS and EPEL.
Could you point me what I can do to join the effort?
Thanks
//Zdenek
On 08/04/17 11:36, Zdenek Sedlak wrote:
Hi,
I have an interest to keep some i686 hardware running with CentOS 7 installed. However there are some packages in EPEL I need so I am willing to help with maintaning/building the i686 packages for both CentOS and EPEL.
Could you point me what I can do to join the effort?
Thanks
//Zdenek
If you target EPEL, you should probably ask that on the EPEL list. AFAIK, as EPEL is rebuild against RHEL (and only RHEL, following their building guidelines), all non-released architectures aren't supported and so not targeted.
That's the reason why Johnny started an initial rebuild (but don't know if that's a continuous effort though) for el7/i{3,6}686 that appeared on https://buildlogs.centos.org/c7-epel/ (but doesn't seem to be maintained nor tracked) but that's not part of any official SIG/effort.
Same for armhfp architecture : as users were searching for such packages that aren't built, we were just using the armhfp builders to try a rebuild of epel SRPMs (without any testing/signing so raw output from the builders) and all that is available here : https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/
I've even been contacted by some people saying that I/we can't call it EPEL as it's not the real one ... Don't know what to think about this, and we tried to have EPEL rebuilding against CentOS for Alt Arches not supported upstream but that went nowhere. Maybe try asking again there ?
On 2017-04-08 16:39, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 08/04/17 11:36, Zdenek Sedlak wrote:
Hi,
I have an interest to keep some i686 hardware running with CentOS 7 installed. However there are some packages in EPEL I need so I am willing to help with maintaning/building the i686 packages for both CentOS and EPEL.
Could you point me what I can do to join the effort?
Thanks
//Zdenek
If you target EPEL, you should probably ask that on the EPEL list. AFAIK, as EPEL is rebuild against RHEL (and only RHEL, following their building guidelines), all non-released architectures aren't supported and so not targeted.
That's the reason why Johnny started an initial rebuild (but don't know if that's a continuous effort though) for el7/i{3,6}686 that appeared on https://buildlogs.centos.org/c7-epel/ (but doesn't seem to be maintained nor tracked) but that's not part of any official SIG/effort.
Same for armhfp architecture : as users were searching for such packages that aren't built, we were just using the armhfp builders to try a rebuild of epel SRPMs (without any testing/signing so raw output from the builders) and all that is available here : https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/
I've even been contacted by some people saying that I/we can't call it EPEL as it's not the real one ... Don't know what to think about this, and we tried to have EPEL rebuilding against CentOS for Alt Arches not supported upstream but that went nowhere. Maybe try asking again there ?
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Well the problem I see is what you describe here - EPEL is following RHEL and I don't expect them to be interested in building EPEL for i386/arm/ppc.
Do you think the AltArch effort could be expanded with EPEL builds for arm/i386/ppc? It wouldn't harm anything, would it? I have a personal interests in i386 and also armhf so I could help with my time/hardware.
Regarding the "EPEL" name - well I don't see this as a major blocker - we could call it APEL (AltArch Packages for Enterprise Linux) or similar. It is just a name and if you do "Provides: epel-release" in apel-release, it would work seamlessly.
//Zdenek
On 2017-04-10 09:54, Zdenek Sedlak wrote:
On 2017-04-08 16:39, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 08/04/17 11:36, Zdenek Sedlak wrote:
Hi,
I have an interest to keep some i686 hardware running with CentOS 7 installed. However there are some packages in EPEL I need so I am willing to help with maintaning/building the i686 packages for both CentOS and EPEL.
Could you point me what I can do to join the effort?
Thanks
//Zdenek
If you target EPEL, you should probably ask that on the EPEL list. AFAIK, as EPEL is rebuild against RHEL (and only RHEL, following their building guidelines), all non-released architectures aren't supported and so not targeted.
That's the reason why Johnny started an initial rebuild (but don't know if that's a continuous effort though) for el7/i{3,6}686 that appeared on https://buildlogs.centos.org/c7-epel/ (but doesn't seem to be maintained nor tracked) but that's not part of any official SIG/effort.
Same for armhfp architecture : as users were searching for such packages that aren't built, we were just using the armhfp builders to try a rebuild of epel SRPMs (without any testing/signing so raw output from the builders) and all that is available here : https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/epel-pass-1/
I've even been contacted by some people saying that I/we can't call it EPEL as it's not the real one ... Don't know what to think about this, and we tried to have EPEL rebuilding against CentOS for Alt Arches not supported upstream but that went nowhere. Maybe try asking again there ?
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Well the problem I see is what you describe here - EPEL is following RHEL and I don't expect them to be interested in building EPEL for i386/arm/ppc.
Do you think the AltArch effort could be expanded with EPEL builds for arm/i386/ppc? It wouldn't harm anything, would it? I have a personal interests in i386 and also armhf so I could help with my time/hardware.
Regarding the "EPEL" name - well I don't see this as a major blocker - we could call it APEL (AltArch Packages for Enterprise Linux) or similar. It is just a name and if you do "Provides: epel-release" in apel-release, it would work seamlessly.
//Zdenek
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Ok I missed EPEL already supports aarch64 + ppc, so it's only the i386 and armhfp.
//Zdenek
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Zdenek Sedlak