On 01/05/2015 02:32 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 01/05/2015 07:44 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote: >> On 05/01/15 14:37, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 01/05/2015 07:01 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote: >>>> On 05/01/15 13:51, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>>> On 12/26/2014 05:24 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: >>>>>> On 25/12/14 16:54, Bob Lightfoot wrote: >>>>>>> Dear Devs: I have been reading this mailing list since C7 >>>>>>> came out and of late have not seen much progress on C7.i686 >>>>>>> aka 32 bit. I don't see a SIG for it on the Centos Pages. >>>>>>> I am wondering has the idea been dropped or where does it >>>>>>> stand? >>>>>> >>>>>> the larger goal is to let this effort be user-led, so >>>>>> starting up a SIG might be a good way to go here. I know that >>>>>> the original bootstrap had most of the builds done - and >>>>>> Andreas ( assited by others ) had gotten most of the bits >>>>>> done. There would be a need to run the updates, and then also >>>>>> identify what portion of the distro is not going to make it >>>>>> to i686 at all. The rest from there should be easy... >>>>>> >>>>>> As I did with the powerpc effort, happy to host a i686 >>>>>> specific google hangout where I can walk people through the >>>>>> build process, and what they need to do in order to affect >>>>>> builds in the centos buildsystem. >>>>>> >>>>>> - KB >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> I now have a working syslinux and kernel in git.centos.org >>>>> under c7-i686 >>>> >>>>> I am building those every time they update for i686 as well as >>>>> x86_64 >>>> >>>>> I have all the RPMs currently built, including the >>>>> java-1.6.0-openjdk built that was an issue .. I'll post the >>>>> RPM list and what is missing (compared to x86_64) and we can >>>>> try to figure out what we need to make build (We may need to >>>>> change some other things that they made exclusivearch x86_64, >>>>> like they did syslinux) >>>> >>>>> Then we can get an i686 test spin out. >>>> >>>>> Here is the kernel and syslinux links for i686 >>>> >>>>> https://git.centos.org/log/rpms!kernel.git/refs!heads!c7-i686 >>>> >>>>> https://git.centos.org/log/rpms!syslinux/refs!heads!c7-i686 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I had to reinstall an old thinkpad (family laptop used by the >>>> kids) and wanted to build a C7/i386 livecd to install it with >>>> minimal desktop, but some packages (like ibus-sayura) are missing >>>> from buildlogs.centos.org and no build logs either for i386, >>>> meaning no built was even tried .. Can we just massively try to >>>> build all packages to i386 to at least have logs and see why they >>>> fail (or not) ? >> >>> c7.00.02/ibus-sayura/20140529190519/1.3.2-3.el7.i386/ >> >> >> Yeah Johnny :-) >> >> I saw that one too, but what I meant was that not all of those >> packages were tried again after that, and were depending on other >> packages. >> In that specific example (ibus-sayura) the >> http://buildlogs.centos.org/c7.00.02/ibus-sayura/20140529190519/1.3.2-3.el7.i386/root.log >> clearly mentions a need for pyOpenSSL, which itself had been built >> after >> (http://buildlogs.centos.org/c7.00.02/pyOpenSSL/20140529192726/0.13.1-3.el7.i386/) >> so when I said 'massive rebuild' I meant retrying all failed packages >> after the first run and that would (probably) succeed now that build >> deps are satisfied :-) > > Right .. I did that once already, but obviously I missed a few. > > I am creating that list of things missing right now, once I get it, I > will look at the build logs to see what we need to try to rebuild. Here is a list of Packages that have a .x86_64.rpm but will not have an i686.rpm If any of these are a show stopper for someone, we will need a way to make them build: http://fpaste.org/167305/ Hopefully we will have an installable test tree soon. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150108/2066840e/attachment-0008.sig>