Mail archive
alpine-infra

build-edge-armhf is broken

From: Jakub Jirutka <jakub_at_jirutka.cz>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:29:35 +0200

Hi,

build-edge-armhf is broken again, please see top of the log http://build.alpinelinux.org/buildlogs/build-edge-armhf/community/notmuch/notmuch-0.25.1-r0.log.

JakubFrom jakub_at_jirutka.cz Sat Oct 28 20:44:17 2017
X-Original-To: alpine-infra_at_alpinelinux.org
Received: from luna.geeknet.cz (luna.geeknet.cz [37.205.9.141])
        by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650215C58D7
        for <alpine-infra_at_alpinelinux.org>; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:44:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
        (No client certificate requested)
        by luna.geeknet.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E5CCABCCE
        for <alpine-infra_at_alpinelinux.org>; Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:44:17 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jirutka.cz; s=mail;
        t09216257; bhvv9H1RyBBClkjc0RpgxVsqKK2SrhyIpwoH+Tx/+hU=;
        hom:Subject:Date:To;
        b=TNz3WZFLZn2AGcCjUHKKSwDo9RoleSNuULoNlEET0TvUultpuIPOkasm4H7MjSQCc
         lkOZmVZBMRO9lFGWHb+YEhTXjgu141jLIZ6XWsr6rlpUHbg63FKuGWd1xy0RNB3D0r
         7PR8YQ+oan1dQxTnaNUpPFTd9wtUzKDY0iAu9t9UFrom: Jakub Jirutka <jakub_at_jirutka.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Building community/cargo, build-edge-x86_64 is stuck
Message-Id: <700B1EC2-05EB-433D-B8CA-886DDF4CAE70_at_jirutka.cz>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:44:17 +0200
To: alpine-infra_at_alpinelinux.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))

Hi,

I’ve updated community/cargo package and removed dependency on external prebuilt binary, so it now (make)depends on itself (you need cargo to build cargo… *#^_at_$~$+). This is not a new situation, we did the same with community/rust some time ago. IIRC it needed some manual intervention on build server, but don’t know any details. Unfortunately I cannot do anything with it, ’cause I don’t have access to the builder.

I changed the abuild to not use external prebuilt binary primarily because the old URI of prebuilt binaries built by upstream’s CI doesn’t work anymore. I didn’t find any other and if I understand their CI configuration, they don’t upload cargo built with musl anywhere (again!). However, we need cargo to build rust and we need rust to build cargo (*put some very angry and vulgar comment here*), so we must take cargo binary from somewhere when bootstrapping from scratch anyway.

So please someone make it work and it be nice if you’d also write what exactly was needed.

JakubFrom ollieparanoid_at_bitmessage.ch Sun Oct 29 12:27:00 2017
X-Original-To: alpine-infra_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Received: from mail.bitmessage.ch (mail.bitmessage.ch [146.228.112.252])
        by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A0E5C4533
        for <alpine-infra_at_lists.alpinelinux.org>; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 12:28:10 +0000 (GMT)
dkim-signature: v a=rsa-sha256; d tmessage.ch; s=mail;
        c=relaxed/relaxed; q s/txt; hom:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:CC:MIME-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References;
        bh=XDmGgwyyvLVn1wZRLMRkUQKosjoBbAT4a2nWDLhG0BY=;
        b=NLQwJPMmNcNaBKSw1vjQSytyY+dLeuEXsSazuJa0uti+mjSUJGap1HrJniYiKJ041zZTTTT9uruE5IYYqnxDst71qD7P+pZ1vOB+El9HhjrhKsiv2OA72obGB05rd0p9ZbP4MsfcIfqF4wCyxJ0xnUb1hle5AYBfwZLvRwWgEAEReceived: from [127.0.0.1] (BITMESSAGE [127.0.0.1])
        by mail.bitmessage.ch with ESMTPA
        ; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 13:26:50 +0100
Subject: Re: Building unofficial packages on Alpine build infrastructure?
To: Natanael Copa <ncopa_at_alpinelinux.org>
References: <514355cb-b6f1-c220-99fc-b096dcb0b693_at_bitmessage.ch>
 <20171027181301.478d6385_at_ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
From: Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid_at_bitmessage.ch>
Cc: alpine-infra_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Message-ID: <9d702d8d-6023-346b-cd1a-fa35323fa96f_at_bitmessage.ch>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 12:27:00 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171027181301.478d6385_at_ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="O9tSTjkKnLh6wSFi2x21ix3tweRd34BNc"

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--O9tSTjkKnLh6wSFi2x21ix3tweRd34BNc
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="rPHlco0AmoNVjppd5nt90txevlTXb31Gr";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid_at_bitmessage.ch>
To: Natanael Copa <ncopa_at_alpinelinux.org>
Cc: alpine-infra_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Message-ID: <9d702d8d-6023-346b-cd1a-fa35323fa96f_at_bitmessage.ch>
Subject: Re: Building unofficial packages on Alpine build infrastructure?
References: <514355cb-b6f1-c220-99fc-b096dcb0b693_at_bitmessage.ch>
 <20171027181301.478d6385_at_ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To: <20171027181301.478d6385_at_ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>

--rPHlco0AmoNVjppd5nt90txevlTXb31Gr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> I am glad to have you around I want help if we can. I have already have
> use for the apk string version compare implementation that you wrote in
> python.

I am happy to read that and a bit curious what you have used for :)

> What are your exact needs? Build servers on what architecture(s)?

x86_64, armhf, aarch64

> Where do you want upload the built packages?

We have two mirrors set up (thanks to Martijn Braam!):

http://postmarketos1.brixit.nl
http://postmarketos2.brixit.nl

Right now they host some outdated test packages we don't use, which were from an experiment with providing packages, where the files inside the apk packages are reproducible. Lots of code has been written for that to "challenge" package contents by rebuilding them and what not, but all in all it didn't seem feasible to continue this effort at this point and would only drive away from how Alpine handles things instead of being closer to upstream. (I can provide more details if someone is interested, there's a lot of theory already written down and it involves every package being rebuilt and challenged by a third party (e.g. Travis) before it gets accepted into the binary repo. Maybe at some far point in the future I can pick this up again and help with Alpine getting reproducible builds upstream.)

When I realized that this path was not working out, and with the quotes from Alpine developers I have put in the first mail of this thread I figured directly building the packages with Alpine's infra would be the next best thing. So users didn't have to trust another entity for building the packages, it would be all from Alpine.

> Do you mind if we follow this up after the v3.7 release?

Not at all!

In fact I realize that the timing for my post wasn't that great because of the upcoming 3.7 release, and it would have been nicer of me if I asked kaniini directly (sorry for that!).

From the answers you have given me, I think it a better short term solution for postmarketOS would be building the packages on our own. This is really good to know, we can move forward with this information.


Thank you very much,
Oliver


Natanael Copa:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:47:00 +0000
> Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid_at_bitmessage.ch> wrote:
>
>> Dear Alpinists,
>>
>>
>> at least Timo Teras[1] and William Pitcock[2] have proposed, that the
>> Alpine package building infrastructure could be used for unofficial
>> Alpine packages, when "the new build infrastructure [is] in place".
>
> replacing the building infra is a big project. I don't know how much
> time it will take, and so far the progress have been slow.
>
>> So postmarketOS[3] is a thin layer on top of Alpine, that provides
>> packages to make it work on mobile devices. Currently every user is
>> compiling these from source, but we would be very grateful if we could
>> use Alpine's infrastructure for building binary packages. That way we
>> could focus more on actual development and giving back to Alpine (e.g.
>> together with Adélie, we're currently upstreaming KDE), instead of
>> duplicating the effort.
>>
>> For reference, here[4] are our current aports. Especially the device
>> folder makes no sense to be upstreamed. We will not build packages that
>> contain closed source blobs (our firmware aports will be refactored to
>> download these files at installation time[5]).
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I am glad to have you around I want help if we can. I have already have
> use for the apk string version compare implementation that you wrote in
> python.
>
> What are your exact needs? Build servers on what architecture(s)?
>
> Where do you want upload the built packages?
>
> Do you mind if we follow this up after the v3.7 release?
>
> Thanks!
>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Oliver Smith
>>
>>
>> [1]: Timo Teras: "This would allow several improvements: - would
>> simplify us supporting contributed ppa type aports trees our infra would
>> build" <https://lists.alpinelinux.org/alpine-devel/5427.html>
>> [2]: William Pitcock: "Once we have the new build infrastructure in
>> place, I am sure that we could arrange for derivatives to make use of
>> it. But I will need to talk with the infra team before committing us to
>> that." <https://github.com/postmarketOS/pmbootstrap/issues/663#issuecomment-333352865>
>> [3]: <https://postmarketOS.org>
>> [4]: <https://github.com/postmarketOS/pmbootstrap/tree/master/aports>
>> [5]: <https://github.com/postmarketOS/pmbootstrap/issues/797>
>>
>>
>
>


--rPHlco0AmoNVjppd5nt90txevlTXb31Gr--

--O9tSTjkKnLh6wSFi2x21ix3tweRd34BNc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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G0gA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--O9tSTjkKnLh6wSFi2x21ix3tweRd34BNc--
Received on Sat Oct 28 2017 - 20:29:35 GMT