1 |
Hello, |
2 |
|
3 |
Given it's the first time I touch Fedora it took a bit of time to get it |
4 |
working (also I had some DNS issues where I couldn't use dnf). |
5 |
|
6 |
But it's done. |
7 |
|
8 |
You can check out the jobs at: |
9 |
|
10 |
For amd64 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile |
11 |
<https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora> |
12 |
of |
13 |
the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=451 |
14 |
For x86 (Job called bootstrap_on_fedora_rap_off, Dockerfile |
15 |
<https://github.com/awesomebytes/gentoo_prefix_ci_32b/blob/master/initial_bootstrap/Dockerfile.fedora> |
16 |
of |
17 |
the job): https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build/results?buildId=450 |
18 |
|
19 |
In 5-6h they should be finished. |
20 |
|
21 |
In general all the builds are here: |
22 |
https://dev.azure.com/12719821/12719821/_build?definitionId=2&_a=summary |
23 |
|
24 |
Given this seems to be running quite nicely. Should I add automated emails |
25 |
when builds fail? |
26 |
I can do it either adding a script that does it or via the CI interface (I |
27 |
think). I won't always be able to check it out quick and make a bug report, |
28 |
so maybe someone else would like to receive the emails about the failures. |
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:28 PM Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o> |
33 |
wrote: |
34 |
|
35 |
> On 1/16/19 2:23 AM, Sam Pfeiffer wrote: |
36 |
> > Hello Michael, |
37 |
> > |
38 |
> > Yeah, just tell me which base distro do you want and I'll add a nightly |
39 |
> job with that one. I just need to find a Docker image for it. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> It doesn't really matter, just not Ubuntu (or anything else that does |
42 |
> 'multiarch'). |
43 |
> I would suggest Fedora though... |
44 |
> |
45 |
> > |
46 |
> > Will the final Gentoo Prefix, once bootstrapped, be any different from |
47 |
> the current one I'm bootstrapping? |
48 |
> |
49 |
> Yes: It does not contain sys-libs/glibc and sys-kernel/linux-headers. |
50 |
> |
51 |
> > (To know if I should also publish automated releases of the bootstrapped |
52 |
> Gentoo Prefix). |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Haven't recognized that you do 'publish automated releases', nice! |
55 |
> |
56 |
> As Prefix/Guest is stronger bound to the host OS compared to Prefix/RAP, |
57 |
> binary releases don't feel that useful here - at least to myself. |
58 |
> |
59 |
> Instead, besides x86_64, also x86 (32bit) would be nice - simply using |
60 |
> 'linux32': |
61 |
> $ PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes linux32 ./bootstrap-prefix.sh /target/prefix |
62 |
> noninteractive |
63 |
> |
64 |
> Thanks a lot! |
65 |
> /haubi/ |
66 |
> |
67 |
> > |
68 |
> > |
69 |
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 04:38 Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o |
70 |
> <mailto:haubi@g.o> wrote: |
71 |
> > |
72 |
> > Hi Sammy, |
73 |
> > |
74 |
> > because of Ubuntu inside these build slaves I do understand you |
75 |
> currently |
76 |
> > perform Prefix RAP bootstraps only - as this is the default anyway. |
77 |
> > |
78 |
> > Do you see a chance to perform Prefix Guest bootstraps as well, |
79 |
> > even if that would require something other distro than Ubuntu? |
80 |
> > |
81 |
> > Otherwise, the only difference is to set the PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes |
82 |
> > environment variable when executing bootstrap-prefix.sh. |
83 |
> > |
84 |
> > Thanks! |
85 |
> > /haubi/ |
86 |
> > |
87 |
> > |
88 |
> |
89 |
> |
90 |
> |
91 |
|
92 |
-- |
93 |
|
94 |
*Sammy Pfeiffer* |
95 |
PhD Candidate at The Magic Lab within UTS. |