From prarit at redhat.com Thu Nov 1 04:00:03 2007 From: prarit at redhat.com (Prarit Bhargava) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 00:00:03 -0400 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Fedora ia64 Buglist 2007-11-1 Message-ID: <200711010400.lA1403vB011752@int-mx1.corp.redhat.com> Bugs filed against fedora-ia64. If a you have filed a bug and it is not listed below, then it is likely you did not file it under the appropriate Product (Fedora Core) or Hardware Category (ia64). Total bugs in each state: RECENT MOVERS (changed in past 7 days): 0 NEW state: 0 From jbass at dmsd.com Tue Nov 6 04:42:09 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status Message-ID: <200711060442.lA64g9D4032021@dmsd.com> with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? What's on the list? have fun, John From jbass at dmsd.com Thu Nov 8 23:24:35 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:24:35 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? Message-ID: <200711082324.lA8NOZeg002885@dmsd.com> So, what's the plan? John Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 From: "John L. Bass" To: dchapman at redhat.com, fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com Subject: Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? What's on the list? have fun, John From dchapman at redhat.com Fri Nov 9 01:18:24 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:18:24 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? In-Reply-To: <200711082324.lA8NOZeg002885@dmsd.com> References: <200711082324.lA8NOZeg002885@dmsd.com> Message-ID: <1194571104.6064.3.camel@phobos> I plan on doing a full rebuild with the F8 set of .src.rpms over the weekend. Then, we need to make sure we have BZs for any packages that do not build cleanly. - Doug On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 16:24 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > So, what's the plan? > > John > > Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 > From: "John L. Bass" > To: dchapman at redhat.com, fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com > Subject: Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status > > with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? > > What's on the list? > > have fun, > John From jbass at dmsd.com Fri Nov 9 14:45:26 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 07:45:26 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? Message-ID: <200711091445.lA9EjQtO006308@dmsd.com> sounds good - look forward to official images. What's the scripts and config files to rebuild the initrd and stage2 images, and build the iso that you used for f8t3? John I plan on doing a full rebuild with the F8 set of .src.rpms over the weekend. Then, we need to make sure we have BZs for any packages that do not build cleanly. - Doug On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 16:24 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > So, what's the plan? > > John > > Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 > From: "John L. Bass" > To: dchapman at redhat.com, fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com > Subject: Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status > > with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? > > What's on the list? > > have fun, > John From prarit at redhat.com Thu Nov 15 05:00:02 2007 From: prarit at redhat.com (Prarit Bhargava) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:00:02 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Fedora ia64 Buglist 2007-11-15 Message-ID: <200711150500.lAF502Lx017563@int-mx1.corp.redhat.com> Bugs filed against fedora-ia64. If a you have filed a bug and it is not listed below, then it is likely you did not file it under the appropriate Product (Fedora Core) or Hardware Category (ia64). Total bugs in each state: RECENT MOVERS (changed in past 7 days): 0 NEW state: 0 From yi.zhan at intel.com Thu Nov 15 10:29:20 2007 From: yi.zhan at intel.com (Zhan, Yi) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:29:20 +0800 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] What's the status about the koji build system? Message-ID: <1195122560.25980.20.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Hi Prarit, I'd like to know about the availability of the koji build system for IA64 and if I need to apply for an account in order to join the development using it. Do you have any idea about these? Thanks, Yi From prarit at redhat.com Thu Nov 15 12:03:32 2007 From: prarit at redhat.com (Prarit Bhargava) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:03:32 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: What's the status about the koji build system? In-Reply-To: <1195122560.25980.20.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> References: <1195122560.25980.20.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Message-ID: <473C3594.3050008@redhat.com> Zhan, Yi wrote: > Hi Prarit, > > I'd like to know about the availability of the koji build system for > IA64 and if I need to apply for an account in order to join the > development using it. Do you have any idea about these? > > Hi Yi, We're *still* in the mode of getting secondary arch status setup -- however, things have improved from the last time I did an update. Currently 3 of 4 systems are being setup as builders within koji. The fourth system, unfortunately, seems to have been DOA. I'm working on returning that system back to ISA. Doug convinced HP to donate a large storage array which will be plugged in to where the fourth system currently sits. P. > Thanks, > Yi > From yi.zhan at intel.com Fri Nov 16 07:23:14 2007 From: yi.zhan at intel.com (Zhan, Yi) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:23:14 +0800 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: What's the status about the koji build system? In-Reply-To: <473C3594.3050008@redhat.com> References: <1195122560.25980.20.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> <473C3594.3050008@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1195197794.25980.65.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> > Currently 3 of 4 systems are being setup as builders within koji. The > fourth system, unfortunately, seems to have been DOA. I'm working on > returning that system back to ISA. > > Doug convinced HP to donate a large storage array which will be plugged > in to where the fourth system currently sits. > > P. > Thanks Prarit and Doug :-) I noticed that the sparc koji build system locate at http://sparc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ and do not merged with the primary arches'. Does the IA64 version will be similar to this? I mean whether the ia64 build systems will be accessible via the internet when they all set up and having a similar url which different from the primary arches', maybe http://ia64.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ or something like? Yi From prarit at redhat.com Fri Nov 16 14:18:48 2007 From: prarit at redhat.com (Prarit Bhargava) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:18:48 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: What's the status about the koji build system? In-Reply-To: <1195197794.25980.65.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> References: <1195122560.25980.20.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> <473C3594.3050008@redhat.com> <1195197794.25980.65.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Message-ID: <473DA6C8.7040105@redhat.com> Zhan, Yi wrote: >> Currently 3 of 4 systems are being setup as builders within koji. The >> fourth system, unfortunately, seems to have been DOA. I'm working on >> returning that system back to ISA. >> >> Doug convinced HP to donate a large storage array which will be plugged >> in to where the fourth system currently sits. >> >> P. >> >> > > Thanks Prarit and Doug :-) I noticed that the sparc koji build system > locate at http://sparc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ and do not merged > with the primary arches'. Does the IA64 version will be similar to this? > I mean whether the ia64 build systems will be accessible via the > internet when they all set up and having a similar url which different > from the primary arches', maybe http://ia64.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ > or something like? > Yes, that's the goal :) -- we hope to be on par with other secondary arches. P. > Yi > From jbass at dmsd.com Mon Nov 19 13:43:32 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:43:32 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? Message-ID: <200711191343.lAJDhWbU031353@dmsd.com> Hi Doug, I assume you are having too much fun. Any update? John From: Doug Chapman To: "John L. Bass" Cc: fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:18:24 -0500 I plan on doing a full rebuild with the F8 set of .src.rpms over the weekend. Then, we need to make sure we have BZs for any packages that do not build cleanly. - Doug On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 16:24 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > So, what's the plan? > > John > > Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 > From: "John L. Bass" > To: dchapman at redhat.com, fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com > Subject: Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status > > with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? > > What's on the list? > > have fun, > John From jbass at dmsd.com Mon Nov 19 13:47:42 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:47:42 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] off topic question ... I2 9040 in an SR870 system? Message-ID: <200711191347.lAJDlgXG031387@dmsd.com> Anybody know if you can stuff 9040's into an older SR870 system with a 9M bios? john From dchapman at redhat.com Mon Nov 19 14:04:14 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:04:14 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? In-Reply-To: <200711191343.lAJDhWbU031353@dmsd.com> References: <200711191343.lAJDhWbU031353@dmsd.com> Message-ID: <1195481054.6512.3.camel@athlon> Nearly there, expect an announcement soon. This took a little longer than expected because I wanted it to be a full release including the debuginfo and source packages. I also want to be sure that yum will work out of the box on the ia64 release. - Doug On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 06:43 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > Hi Doug, > > I assume you are having too much fun. Any update? > > John > > From: Doug Chapman > To: "John L. Bass" > Cc: fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com > Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:18:24 -0500 > > I plan on doing a full rebuild with the F8 set of .src.rpms over the > weekend. Then, we need to make sure we have BZs for any packages that > do not build cleanly. > > - Doug > > On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 16:24 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > > So, what's the plan? > > > > John > > > > Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:42:09 -0700 > > From: "John L. Bass" > > To: dchapman at redhat.com, fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com > > Subject: Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8T3 ia64 status > > > > with final cut here shortly, anything I can do to help? > > > > What's on the list? > > > > have fun, > > John > From jbass at dmsd.com Mon Nov 19 14:07:57 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:07:57 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: ok ... it's out, what's the plan and ia64 availability? Message-ID: <200711191407.lAJE7vlW031523@dmsd.com> Thanks Doug :) If you need build checkout installs on SR870's before release, would be happy to. John From dchapman at redhat.com Wed Nov 21 15:49:34 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:49:34 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> Fedora 8 for ia64 release notes 11/19/2007 - Doug Chapman This release was built from the SRPM packages from the Fedora 8 release. Users should refer to those release notes for general issues as these notes only refer to issues specific to the ia64 build. This was a manually built release. We hope for this to be the last Fedora-ia64 release that is done manually and future releases will be done as part of the Fedora secondary architecture project. Updated information on Fedora for ia64 can be found at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/IA64 We welcome ia64 users to give feedback about this release at: fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com * Availability Fedora-ia64 is available from mirror sites at HP and SGI. We would appreciate other interested mirror sites as well. If you have a site where you would like to mirror these bits please contact doug.chapman at hp.com to be added to the mirror list. The current list of mirror sites can be found at: http://free.linux.hp.com/Fedora-ia64/mirrorlist.cgi * yum configured properly by default This release contains custom yum config files which point to the Fedora-ia64 mirrors. * updated yum config There was a small mistake made in the yum config files packaged with this release. Some packages may not be found until the fedora-release package is updated. An update for this is already available and can be installed with: yum update fedora-release * Missing packages: Some packages from Fedora do not currently build on ia64. For some packages this is expected as they are x86 specific but there are several other base packages that currently have build failures on ia64 which are being investigated. Because of this after an install you may notice that several packages were installed with unsatisfied dependencies. The known packages from a base install that are missing are: mono libXxf86dga perl(BSD::Resource) libgnomeprint22 xorg-x11-drv-calcomp xorg-x11-drv-citron xorg-x11-drv-dmc xorg-x11-drv-dynapro xorg-x11-drv-microtouch xorg-x11-drv-penmount tetex-dvips tetex-fonts tetex-latex texinfo-tex There are likely others but this is what I see missing when I install with all package groups selected. Please discuss missing packages on fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com before filing BZs. * no xen virtualization There are ia64 build failures on the xen and libvirt packages so this release does not currently support xen. This will hopefully be resolved in an update package. * customized packages Some packages required minor edits to build for ia64. The SRPMs for these packages are available as well. The modified packages include: pango-1.18.3-1drc.fc8.ia64.rpm pango-devel-1.18.3-1drc.fc8.ia64.rpm fedora-release-8-5ia64.noarch.rpm however other custom packages may be released as updates to resolve some of the missing dependencies issues. From jbass at dmsd.com Wed Nov 21 20:25:08 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:25:08 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711212025.lALKP8Hl019258@dmsd.com> yippie!! thanks Doug!! From yi.zhan at intel.com Thu Nov 22 08:34:51 2007 From: yi.zhan at intel.com (Zhan, Yi) Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:34:51 +0800 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> References: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> Message-ID: <1195720491.20842.39.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 10:49 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote: > Fedora 8 for ia64 release notes > 11/19/2007 - Doug Chapman > > This release was built from the SRPM packages from the Fedora 8 release. > Users should refer to those release notes for general issues as these > notes only refer to issues specific to the ia64 build. This was a manually > built release. We hope for this to be the last Fedora-ia64 release that > is done manually and future releases will be done as part of the Fedora > secondary architecture project. Thanks for your work :) I have installed it on my tiger box successfully (in text mode), most of things worked fine. But the GUI install method didn't work, it seems that X server didn't start normally so I had no chance to see the X window yet. I will try to locate this one and post a detailed description later. > * Missing packages: > Some packages from Fedora do not currently build on ia64. For some > packages this is expected as they are x86 specific but there are > several other base packages that currently have build failures on > ia64 which are being investigated. Because of this after an install > you may notice that several packages were installed with unsatisfied > dependencies. The known packages from a base install that are missing > are: > mono > libXxf86dga > perl(BSD::Resource) > * no xen virtualization > There are ia64 build failures on the xen and libvirt packages so this > release does not currently support xen. This will hopefully be resolved > in an update package. > I have filed BZs for libXxf86dga and xen issues several days ago (#375981 and #353821 respectively), but seems both were ignored. Are the issues of the two packages in this release the same ones? And I noticed that the bug described in #350941 (Wrong entry in fstab) by George still exists. One more question :) Does the build issue of perl stuff still exists? Thanks, Yi From jbass at dmsd.com Thu Nov 22 17:42:33 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:42:33 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711221742.lAMHgXL5030026@dmsd.com> Hi Doug, GUI install here also fails to start X server, so did several text installs. Seem to have problem with rpm ... followup update/install sequence left rpm trashed on all three machines I tried it. John [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum upgrade Fedora-ia64 2.1 kB 00:00 Fedora-ia64-debuginfo 951 B 00:00 updates-ia64-debuginfo 951 B 00:00 Fedora-ia64-soruce 100% |=========================| 951 B 00:00 updates-ia64 100% |=========================| 951 B 00:00 Setting up Upgrade Process Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package fedora-release.noarch 0:8-6ia64 set to be updated --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Updating: fedora-release noarch 8-6ia64 updates-ia64 28 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================= Install 0 Package(s) Update 1 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) Total download size: 28 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: (1/1): fedora-release-8-6 100% |=========================| 28 kB 00:00 Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Finished Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Running Transaction Updating : fedora-release ######################### [1/2] Cleanup : fedora-release ######################### [2/2] Updated: fedora-release.noarch 0:8-6ia64 Complete! [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum install openmpi Fedora-ia64-soruce-everything 951 B 00:00 primary.xml.gz 1.1 MB 00:03 Fedora-ia6: ################################################## 4384/4384 Fedora-ia64-debuginfo-everything 951 B 00:00 primary.xml.gz 502 kB 00:02 Fedora-ia6: ################################################## 2778/2778 Fedora-ia64 base 2.1 kB 00:00 primary.sqlite.bz2 1.0 MB 00:03 Fedora-ia64-everything 2.1 kB 00:00 primary.sqlite.bz2 4.3 MB 00:13 Setting up Install Process Parsing package install arguments Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package openmpi.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: openmpi-libs = 1.2.4-1.fc8 for package: openmpi --> Processing Dependency: libopen-pal.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi --> Processing Dependency: libopen-rte.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi --> Processing Dependency: libmpi.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi --> Running transaction check ---> Package openmpi-libs.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: libtorque.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi-libs --> Running transaction check ---> Package libtorque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: torque = 2.1.9-1.fc8 for package: libtorque --> Running transaction check ---> Package torque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 set to be updated --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Installing: openmpi ia64 1.2.4-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 153 k Installing for dependencies: libtorque ia64 2.1.9-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 107 k openmpi-libs ia64 1.2.4-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 1.4 M torque ia64 2.1.9-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 23 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================= Install 4 Package(s) Update 0 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) Total download size: 1.7 M Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: (1/4): openmpi-1.2.4-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 153 kB 00:00 (2/4): libtorque-2.1.9-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 107 kB 00:00 (3/4): torque-2.1.9-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 23 kB 00:00 (4/4): openmpi-libs-1.2.4-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 1.4 MB 00:04 Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Finished Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Running Transaction Installing: torque ######################### [1/4] Installing: libtorque ######################### [2/4] Installing: openmpi-libs ######################### [3/4] Installing: openmpi ######################### [4/4] Installed: openmpi.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 Dependency Installed: libtorque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 openmpi-libs.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 torque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 Complete! [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum -y install pvm Setting up Install Process Parsing package install arguments Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package pvm.ia64 0:3.4.5-7.fc6.1 set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: /bin/csh for package: pvm --> Running transaction check ---> Package tcsh.ia64 0:6.15-1.fc8 set to be updated --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Installing: pvm ia64 3.4.5-7.fc6.1 Fedora-ia64-everything 2.8 M Installing for dependencies: tcsh ia64 6.15-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 580 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================= Install 2 Package(s) Update 0 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) Total download size: 3.4 M Downloading Packages: (1/2): tcsh-6.15-1.fc8.ia 100% |=========================| 580 kB 00:02 (2/2): pvm-3.4.5-7.fc6.1. 100% |=========================| 2.8 MB 00:11 Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Finished Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Running Transaction Installing: tcsh ######################### [1/2] Installing: pvm ######################### [2/2] rpmdb: page 23: illegal page type or format rpmdb: PANIC: Invalid argument rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery From dchapman at redhat.com Fri Nov 23 17:18:45 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:18:45 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <1195720491.20842.39.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> References: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> <1195720491.20842.39.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Message-ID: <1195838325.3332.3.camel@centrino> On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 16:34 +0800, Zhan, Yi wrote: > > Thanks for your work :) I have installed it on my tiger box successfully > (in text mode), most of things worked fine. But the GUI install method > didn't work, it seems that X server didn't start normally so I had no > chance to see the X window yet. I will try to locate this one and post a > detailed description later. > There were several X server packages that failed to build. I am guessing that this may be why X doesn't start on your system. I have not had a chance to look into why they don't build yet. > One more question :) Does the build issue of perl stuff still exists? Many of the perl packages fail to build still. When I built this release however I did grab the noarch perl packages from an x86_64 build so that works around many of the issues but there are still some binary perl packages that we need that are missing. - Doug From dchapman at redhat.com Fri Nov 23 17:21:19 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:21:19 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <200711221742.lAMHgXL5030026@dmsd.com> References: <200711221742.lAMHgXL5030026@dmsd.com> Message-ID: <1195838479.3332.6.camel@centrino> John, Interesting, looks like something funny is happening with the pvm package. Have you tried this package on other arches? Just wondering if this is an ia64 only issue. - Doug On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 10:42 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > Hi Doug, > > GUI install here also fails to start X server, so did several text installs. > > > Seem to have problem with rpm ... followup update/install sequence left > rpm trashed on all three machines I tried it. > > John > > [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum upgrade > Fedora-ia64 2.1 kB 00:00 > Fedora-ia64-debuginfo 951 B 00:00 > updates-ia64-debuginfo 951 B 00:00 > Fedora-ia64-soruce 100% |=========================| 951 B 00:00 > updates-ia64 100% |=========================| 951 B 00:00 > Setting up Upgrade Process > Resolving Dependencies > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package fedora-release.noarch 0:8-6ia64 set to be updated > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > > Dependencies Resolved > > ============================================================================= > Package Arch Version Repository Size > ============================================================================= > Updating: > fedora-release noarch 8-6ia64 updates-ia64 28 k > > Transaction Summary > ============================================================================= > Install 0 Package(s) > Update 1 Package(s) > Remove 0 Package(s) > > Total download size: 28 k > Is this ok [y/N]: y > Downloading Packages: > (1/1): fedora-release-8-6 100% |=========================| 28 kB 00:00 > Running rpm_check_debug > Running Transaction Test > Finished Transaction Test > Transaction Test Succeeded > Running Transaction > Updating : fedora-release ######################### [1/2] > Cleanup : fedora-release ######################### [2/2] > > Updated: fedora-release.noarch 0:8-6ia64 > Complete! > [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum install openmpi > Fedora-ia64-soruce-everything 951 B 00:00 > primary.xml.gz 1.1 MB 00:03 > Fedora-ia6: ################################################## 4384/4384 > Fedora-ia64-debuginfo-everything 951 B 00:00 > primary.xml.gz 502 kB 00:02 > Fedora-ia6: ################################################## 2778/2778 > Fedora-ia64 base 2.1 kB 00:00 > primary.sqlite.bz2 1.0 MB 00:03 > Fedora-ia64-everything 2.1 kB 00:00 > primary.sqlite.bz2 4.3 MB 00:13 > Setting up Install Process > Parsing package install arguments > Resolving Dependencies > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package openmpi.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 set to be updated > --> Processing Dependency: openmpi-libs = 1.2.4-1.fc8 for package: openmpi > --> Processing Dependency: libopen-pal.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi > --> Processing Dependency: libopen-rte.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi > --> Processing Dependency: libmpi.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package openmpi-libs.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 set to be updated > --> Processing Dependency: libtorque.so.0()(64bit) for package: openmpi-libs > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package libtorque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 set to be updated > --> Processing Dependency: torque = 2.1.9-1.fc8 for package: libtorque > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package torque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 set to be updated > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > > Dependencies Resolved > > ============================================================================= > Package Arch Version Repository Size > ============================================================================= > Installing: > openmpi ia64 1.2.4-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 153 k > Installing for dependencies: > libtorque ia64 2.1.9-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 107 k > openmpi-libs ia64 1.2.4-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 1.4 M > torque ia64 2.1.9-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 23 k > > Transaction Summary > ============================================================================= > Install 4 Package(s) > Update 0 Package(s) > Remove 0 Package(s) > > Total download size: 1.7 M > Is this ok [y/N]: y > Downloading Packages: > (1/4): openmpi-1.2.4-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 153 kB 00:00 > (2/4): libtorque-2.1.9-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 107 kB 00:00 > (3/4): torque-2.1.9-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 23 kB 00:00 > (4/4): openmpi-libs-1.2.4-1.fc8.ia64.rpm 1.4 MB 00:04 > Running rpm_check_debug > Running Transaction Test > Finished Transaction Test > Transaction Test Succeeded > Running Transaction > Installing: torque ######################### [1/4] > Installing: libtorque ######################### [2/4] > Installing: openmpi-libs ######################### [3/4] > Installing: openmpi ######################### [4/4] > > Installed: openmpi.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 > Dependency Installed: libtorque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 openmpi-libs.ia64 0:1.2.4-1.fc8 torque.ia64 0:2.1.9-1.fc8 > Complete! > [root at mpi64-200 ~]# yum -y install pvm > Setting up Install Process > Parsing package install arguments > Resolving Dependencies > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package pvm.ia64 0:3.4.5-7.fc6.1 set to be updated > --> Processing Dependency: /bin/csh for package: pvm > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package tcsh.ia64 0:6.15-1.fc8 set to be updated > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > > Dependencies Resolved > > ============================================================================= > Package Arch Version Repository Size > ============================================================================= > Installing: > pvm ia64 3.4.5-7.fc6.1 Fedora-ia64-everything 2.8 M > Installing for dependencies: > tcsh ia64 6.15-1.fc8 Fedora-ia64-everything 580 k > > Transaction Summary > ============================================================================= > Install 2 Package(s) > Update 0 Package(s) > Remove 0 Package(s) > > Total download size: 3.4 M > Downloading Packages: > (1/2): tcsh-6.15-1.fc8.ia 100% |=========================| 580 kB 00:02 > (2/2): pvm-3.4.5-7.fc6.1. 100% |=========================| 2.8 MB 00:11 > Running rpm_check_debug > Running Transaction Test > Finished Transaction Test > Transaction Test Succeeded > Running Transaction > Installing: tcsh ######################### [1/2] > Installing: pvm ######################### [2/2] > rpmdb: page 23: illegal page type or format > rpmdb: PANIC: Invalid argument > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery From jbass at dmsd.com Fri Nov 23 23:01:13 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 16:01:13 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711232301.lANN1DPG005348@dmsd.com> John, Interesting, looks like something funny is happening with the pvm package. Have you tried this package on other arches? Just wondering if this is an ia64 only issue. - Doug I haven't gotten to upgrading the pentium/xeon cluster to F8 yet. Will look at that this weekend. Once rpm is trashed, rpm --rebuilddb also croaks. Is there a way to recover the rpm db without reinstall? I suspect it's an issue with ia64 only. John From jbass at dmsd.com Sat Nov 24 00:59:33 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 17:59:33 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711240059.lAO0xXcf005719@dmsd.com> not just pvm ... had it just do the same thing on the initial yum upgrade. the initial fault scrolled off the screen capture, did this for nearly every package. John rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery --> Processing Dependency: /sbin/ldconfig for package: libfontenc rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery --> Processing Dependency: /sbin/ldconfig for package: libXcomposite rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery From yi.zhan at intel.com Mon Nov 26 10:56:55 2007 From: yi.zhan at intel.com (Zhan, Yi) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:56:55 +0800 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] The missing packages Message-ID: <1196074615.23862.37.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Hi all, I looked into some of the missing packages today, below are the build results and some analysis. The build system is Fedora 8 IA64 (the current release) and I tested the packages both using "rpmbuild --rebuild" and under mock. * mono This package was failed with a configure error which complain that "library libunwind not found". Change the BuildRequire of libunwind to libunwind-devel can fix it. ----------------------------------------------------------- --- mono.spec.orig 2007-11-26 17:01:58.000000000 +0800 +++ mono.spec 2007-11-26 17:02:43.000000000 +0800 @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ BuildRequires: libgdiplus-devel >= 1.2.1 BuildRequires: zlib-devel %ifarch ia64 -BuildRequires: libunwind +BuildRequires: libunwind-devel %endif # Required for mono-libdir.patch BuildRequires: automake libtool ----------------------------------------------------------- * perl(BSD::Resource) and texinfo Might be weird, but these two packages both can build cleanly on my system. * libgnomeprint22 Built cleanly on my system, only one thing to mention: A package, which is also missing from the "everything", need to be built first to resolve the dependencies problem: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.005-3.fc8.src.rpm . * xorg-x11-drv-* All of the xorg-x11-drv-* packages here were failed with a similiar problem: TS_Raw and TS_Scaled undeclared (some have a few other macros or variables undeclared). The cause of these probably is a version miss match between the inputproto headers and the drivers. The inputproto is a little too new for these packages. The inputproto is part of the xorg-x11-proto-devel package and a similiar disscussion about the issue could be found here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2007-January/021091.html. But I haven't managed to figure out the right way to solove this issue yet. Yi From jbass at dmsd.com Mon Nov 26 14:29:42 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:29:42 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711261429.lAQETgqk025841@dmsd.com> John, Interesting, looks like something funny is happening with the pvm package. Have you tried this package on other arches? Just wondering if this is an ia64 only issue. - Doug Over the weekend I broke off several machines from my Pentium/Xeon cluster and installed F8 i386 without any issues. I also reinstalled the 5 ia64 machines with corrupted rpm databases, as rpm --rebuilddb just crashed too. In reinstalling, I specifically selected the lam and pvm packages, only to notice after the install that they were not present again -- something of a suprise that anaconda would quitely drop requested packages from the install. John From jbass at dmsd.com Mon Nov 26 14:53:38 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:53:38 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711261453.lAQErc6l025956@dmsd.com> I also installed F8 ia64 on my two Intel SR870BH2 systems which both have these 10GBit Intel cards installed: 07:01.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation PRO/10GbE LR Server Adapter (rev 01) Both crashed loading the driver on the reboot following the install. Had to boot to single user and disable the device before I could get F8 to run. I also loaded F7, and got the same results, so it seems this driver has been broken for a while in Fedora ia64. It autoconfigured, selecting this driver: alias eth2 ixgb John From yi.zhan at intel.com Tue Nov 27 10:52:26 2007 From: yi.zhan at intel.com (Zhan, Yi) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:52:26 +0800 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <1195838325.3332.3.camel@centrino> References: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> <1195720491.20842.39.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> <1195838325.3332.3.camel@centrino> Message-ID: <1196160746.6886.82.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 12:18 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote: > There were several X server packages that failed to build. I am > guessing that this may be why X doesn't start on your system. I have > not had a chance to look into why they don't build yet. > A small finding about this: After install, the default /etc/xorg.conf contains below content -------------------------------------------------- Section "Device" Identifier "Videocard0" Driver "vesa" EndSection -------------------------------------------------- The X server can started normally by changing the value of "Driver" to the correct one, which is "ati" to me. In fact, the weird thing is that many drivers is missing in the stage2.img. The directory /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/ only contains one driver "vesa_drv.so". Since the xorg.conf seems to be generated at stage2 by using pyxf86config, I guess this is why the string 'Driver "vesa"' appears in the default config file. We do have the 'ati' and many other drivers built in "everything", but pungi just refused to add them to the stage2.img. Do you have any idea why this happen? Thanks, Yi > > > One more question :) Does the build issue of perl stuff still > exists? > > Many of the perl packages fail to build still. When I built this > release however I did grab the noarch perl packages from an x86_64 > build > so that works around many of the issues but there are still some > binary > perl packages that we need that are missing. > > > - Doug From dchapman at redhat.com Wed Nov 28 18:05:06 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:05:06 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] Re: FW: [Intel-linux] Internal Fedora 8 mirror? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1196273106.22119.37.camel@deimos.americas.hpqcorp.net> Rob, FYI, I am cc'ing fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com where most of the related discussions are happening. I suggest subscribing since you have interest in Fedora on ia64: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ia64-list I just recently released F8 for ia64. You can find the release notes here: http://free.linux.hp.com/Fedora-ia64/F8-ia64-release-notes.txt Currently I have been doing builds manually with some hacked up scripts that build packages under mock. The longer term plan is to have the builds automatically done on a nightly basis. We are primarily waiting for the fedora "secondary architecture" infrastructure to be in place. The current F8 bits are somewhat incomplete due to some packages that do not currently build on ia64. Most of the missing packages are Xorg/gnome/kde related so if you install using a serial console only (as I typically do) it is still very usable. The area where we could use the most help is in identifying what packages are needed and why they don't build. I need to get a list of known issues organized so we know what the status is as well as who is working on what so we don't duplicate efforts. Currently I am pretty well tied up with RHEL5 work so that may not happen for a couple weeks. In the meantime I suggest discussing issues on fedora-ia64-list at redhat.com. - Doug On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 09:43 -0800, Nesius, Robert wrote: > Hi Doug, > > Tony Luck pointed me in your direction in regards to Fedora RPMs on > ia64. I'm interested in lending a hand with the builds. If you can > use the help and are interested let me know. > > I build Open Source tools for internal use within Intel across > multiple platforms and distros, so I have a fair bit of experience > with that. > > Cheers, > > -Rob > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Luck, Tony > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:22 AM > To: Nesius, Robert > Subject: RE: [Intel-linux] Internal Fedora 8 mirror? > > > Where's the work happening for getting RPMs built on ia64 for Fedora? > > Robert, > > Doug Chapman [dchapman at redhat.com] is the main driving force. RedHat > has a small farm of Itanium systems that were provided by the Itanium > Solutions Alliance for this work. I'm not sure where these are > physically > located, or if it is possible to get remote access to them. Contact > Doug if you want to join in. > > -Tony From dchapman at redhat.com Wed Nov 28 18:35:51 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:35:51 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <200711261453.lAQErc6l025956@dmsd.com> References: <200711261453.lAQErc6l025956@dmsd.com> Message-ID: <1196274951.22119.48.camel@deimos.americas.hpqcorp.net> John, Please open a BZ for this one. See if you can get the stack trace. I don't have one of these cards available so I am not able to reproduce. - Doug On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 07:53 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > I also installed F8 ia64 on my two Intel SR870BH2 systems which both have these > 10GBit Intel cards installed: > > 07:01.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation PRO/10GbE LR Server Adapter (rev 01) > > Both crashed loading the driver on the reboot following the install. Had to boot to single > user and disable the device before I could get F8 to run. I also loaded F7, and got the > same results, so it seems this driver has been broken for a while in Fedora ia64. > > It autoconfigured, selecting this driver: > > alias eth2 ixgb > > John From dchapman at redhat.com Wed Nov 28 18:38:53 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:38:53 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <200711240059.lAO0xXcf005719@dmsd.com> References: <200711240059.lAO0xXcf005719@dmsd.com> Message-ID: <1196275133.22119.52.camel@deimos.americas.hpqcorp.net> John, I am not able to reproduce this. My guesses are it is either a hardware issue (although I would expect the type of error to be much more random) or related to what packages you had previously had installed. Have you seen this on more than one box? If you only have one system available do you have a different disk you can install to? If not tied to that hardware, can you get the output of rpm -qa _before_ you do any yum updates so I can see what packages you have installed that I do not? thanks, - Doug On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 17:59 -0700, John L. Bass wrote: > not just pvm ... had it just do the same thing on the initial yum upgrade. > > the initial fault scrolled off the screen capture, did this for nearly every package. > > John > > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > --> Processing Dependency: /sbin/ldconfig for package: libfontenc > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > --> Processing Dependency: /sbin/ldconfig for package: libXcomposite > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->get: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > rpmdb: PANIC: fatal region error detected; run recovery > error: db4 error(-30977) from db->cursor: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery > From dchapman at redhat.com Wed Nov 28 18:53:22 2007 From: dchapman at redhat.com (Doug Chapman) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:53:22 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available In-Reply-To: <1196160746.6886.82.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> References: <1195660174.25855.1.camel@phobos> <1195720491.20842.39.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> <1195838325.3332.3.camel@centrino> <1196160746.6886.82.camel@lantedev.sh.intel.com> Message-ID: <1196276002.22119.55.camel@deimos.americas.hpqcorp.net> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 18:52 +0800, Zhan, Yi wrote: > On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 12:18 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote: > > There were several X server packages that failed to build. I am > > guessing that this may be why X doesn't start on your system. I have > > not had a chance to look into why they don't build yet. > > > > A small finding about this: > > After install, the default /etc/xorg.conf contains below content > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Section "Device" > Identifier "Videocard0" > Driver "vesa" > EndSection > > -------------------------------------------------- > > The X server can started normally by changing the value of "Driver" to > the correct one, which is "ati" to me. > > In fact, the weird thing is that many drivers is missing in the > stage2.img. The directory /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/ only > contains one driver "vesa_drv.so". Since the xorg.conf seems to be > generated at stage2 by using pyxf86config, I guess this is why the > string 'Driver "vesa"' appears in the default config file. We do have > the 'ati' and many other drivers built in "everything", but pungi just > refused to add them to the stage2.img. > > Do you have any idea why this happen? This sounds like a packaging error on my part. I did need to do some customizing due to some of the X server packages not building. Possibly ati was left out due to this. - Doug From jbass at dmsd.com Wed Nov 28 22:53:16 2007 From: jbass at dmsd.com (John L. Bass) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:53:16 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] F8 for ia64 now available Message-ID: <200711282253.lASMrGL9007499@dmsd.com> I'll see if I can find the kickstart file that created those installs. I've since reinstalled the five systems, with less of the kitchen sink. John John, I am not able to reproduce this. My guesses are it is either a hardware issue (although I would expect the type of error to be much more random) or related to what packages you had previously had installed. Have you seen this on more than one box? If you only have one system available do you have a different disk you can install to? If not tied to that hardware, can you get the output of rpm -qa _before_ you do any yum updates so I can see what packages you have installed that I do not? thanks, - Doug From berrange at redhat.com Fri Nov 30 19:27:18 2007 From: berrange at redhat.com (Daniel P. Berrange) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:27:18 +0000 Subject: [Fedora-ia64-list] [FW: [Fedora-xen] FYI: The plan for Xen kernels in Fedora 9] Message-ID: <20071130192718.GC32711@redhat.com> FYI, this mail details our plans for i386/x86_64 Xen kernels in Fedora 9. It has pretty significant implications for Xen on ia64 in F9 and beyond since AFAIK there isn't any active work on ia64 Xen wrt to pv_ops (or even an ia64 pv_ops impl ?). Suggestions/ideas/offers/plans welcomed wrt to ia64 + xen... Regards, Dan. ----- Forwarded message from "Daniel P. Berrange" ----- > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:59:09 +0000 > From: "Daniel P. Berrange" > To: fedora-xen at redhat.com > Subject: [Fedora-xen] FYI: The plan for Xen kernels in Fedora 9 > > This is a friendly alert of the major plans we have for Xen kernels in > Fedora 9 timeframe... > > Since we first added Xen in Fedora Core 5, our kernels have been based on > a forward-port of XenSource's upstream Xen kernels, to new LKML. For a > long time we ported their 2.6.16 tree to 2.6.18. Now we do ports of their > 2.6.18 tree to 2.6.21/22/23, etc. At the same time, upstream Linux gained > Xen support for i386 DomU, and shortly x86_64 DomU, and is generally > getting ever more virtualization capabilities. > > As everyone knows, we have tended to lag behind Fedora's state-of-the-art > bare metal kernels by several releases due to the effort required to port > Xen to newer LKML releases. Despite our best efforts, this lag has been > getting worse, not better. > > We have taken the decision, that this situation is unacceptable for Fedora 9. > We simply cannot spend more time forward porting Xen kernels. Either Xen has > to be dropped entirely, or we need a different strategy for dealing with the > kernels. Since people seeem to use Xen, we have decided not to drop it :-) > > So the plan is to re-focus 100% of all Xen kernel efforts onto paravirt_ops. > LKML already has i386 pv_ops + Xen DomU. We intend to build on this to > add: > > - x64_64 pv_ops > - x86_64 Xen DomU on pv_ops > - i386 & x86_64 Xen Dom0 on pv_ops > - memory balloon > - paravirt framebuffer > - save/restore > > All of this based on same LKML release as Fedora bare metal. If all goes to > plan it may even be in the base kernel RPM, instead of kernel-xen, but thats > a minor concern compared to the actual coding. > > Getting all this done for Fedora 9 is seriously ambitious, but it is the only > long term sustainable option, other than dropping Xen entirely. > > What this means though, is that Fedora 9 Xen will certainly be going through > periods of instability and will certainly be even buggier than normal. F9 > may well end up lacking features compared to Xen in Fedora 8 & earlier (eg no > PCI device passthrough, or CPU hotplug). On the plus side though we will be > 100% back in sync with bare metal kernel versions & hopefully even have a > lot of this stuff merged in LKML to make ongoing maintainence sustainable. > Short term pain; Long term gain! > > I have not got any ETA on when any of these kernel changes will appear in > rawhide - some time before the F9 feature freeze date is best guesstimate. > We will alert people when the time comes. There is a F9 feature page > with some amount of info about the plan... > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvops > > In terms of Fedora 6/7/8 maintainence... The kernel-xen in these existing > releases already lags behind the bare metal kernel version by 2-3 releases. > We do not intend to continue trying to rebase the kernel-xen in existing > Fedora releases. It will be essentially important bug-fix mode only. This > is neccessary to enable maximum resources to be focused on the critical > Fedora 9 Xen work. > > Regards, > Dan ...on behalf of some very busy Fedora Xen kernel developers :-) > -- > |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| > |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| > |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| > |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=| > > -- > Fedora-xen mailing list > Fedora-xen at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen > ----- End forwarded message ----- -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|