For discussion of Alpine Linux development and developer support

15 10

[alpine-devel] Planning for 3.10 release

Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
Sender timestamp
1554305305
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Hi,

I would like to make 3.10 release in the beginning of May, so I would
like to share what the plan is to get there.

We need to start the 3.10 build servers as soon as possible. Before we
do that we need to have a "feature" freeze of the toolchain and core
components. This means, gcc version, musl libc, binutils, make etc. If
those need upgrade, then we need to do so *now*.

I think we probably also need to upgrade python 3.7, which is a major
project.

After that we need to freeze all the other build tools and compilers,
like go, rust, clang etc.

Things that I would like to have included in 3.10:
- python 3.7
- at least one more architecture for rust.
- update the other languages that uses llvm and try get rid of old llvm.
- openjdk9 and openjdk10?
- move ceph to community

Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?

Are there any other ABI breaking upgrades that requires lots of
rebuilds? We should try prioritize those too.

We should also try fix as many bugs as possible.

It would be nice if someone could help me look over the bug tracker and
identify what issues should be prioritized for 3.10 and mark those as
"High" priority.

Thanks!

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Chloe Kudryavtsev
Details
Message ID
<66704640-2373-401e-f81a-fa7f9c0a4828@toastin.space>
In-Reply-To
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554310717
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On 4/3/2019 11:28 AM, Natanael Copa wrote:
> Things that I would like to have included in 3.10:
> - at least one more architecture for rust.

+1

> - update the other languages that uses llvm and try get rid of old llvm.

+1

> Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?

I would really like to squeeze in GCC 9 (with D support, which has 
landed in it).
However, 9.1 is releasing "imminently" (expected mid-April, about 12 P1 
bugs left).
In the case that we don't think we can squeeze it into 3.10, I'd like to 
put it on record here (so we remember it for 3.11).


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
A. Wilcox
Details
Message ID
<09a42fb3-6f44-dd22-368f-95aa26e8230f@adelielinux.org>
In-Reply-To
<20190403204229.7e38d83e@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554321435
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On 04/03/19 13:42, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 18:32:42 +0000
> "Francesco Colista" <fcolista@alpinelinux.org> wrote:
>> qt5 from 5.12.1 to 5.12.2.
> that will not break ABI


It sure will.

At least qt-creator, plasma (for pmOS) and a few other packages require
full rebuilds after any minor version bump of Qt; even patchlevel.

--arw


-- 
A. Wilcox (awilfox)
Project Lead, Adélie Linux
https://www.adelielinux.org
Francesco Colista
Details
Message ID
<f249cb75f8a664f50cf3acb7d3d611b8@alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554316362
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
> Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?

Any plan to promote wireguard from testing to community?

> Are there any other ABI breaking upgrades that requires lots of
> rebuilds? We should try prioritize those too.

qt5 from 5.12.1 to 5.12.2.

Thanks!

.: Francesco Colista
.: Alpine Linux Core Dev Team


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190403190512.071c0423@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To
<66704640-2373-401e-f81a-fa7f9c0a4828@toastin.space> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554311112
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 12:58:37 -0400
Chloe Kudryavtsev <toast@toastin.space> wrote:

> On 4/3/2019 11:28 AM, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > Things that I would like to have included in 3.10:
> > - at least one more architecture for rust.  
> 
> +1
> 
> > - update the other languages that uses llvm and try get rid of old llvm.  
> 
> +1
> 
> > Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?  
> 
> I would really like to squeeze in GCC 9 (with D support, which has 
> landed in it).
> However, 9.1 is releasing "imminently" (expected mid-April, about 12 P1 
> bugs left).

I don't think we should wait for that. It may be delayed, and gcc
upgrades has traditionally caused build failures for various packages
so lots of work will be needed to troubleshoot and report bugs upstream.

We may want upgrade to gcc 9 soon after 3.10 release though.

-nc

> In the case that we don't think we can squeeze it into 3.10, I'd like to 
> put it on record here (so we remember it for 3.11).
> 
> 
> ---
> Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
> Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
> ---
> 



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Milan P. Stanić
Details
Message ID
<20190403180821.GA16228@arya.arvanta.net>
In-Reply-To
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554314901
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 17:28, Natanael Copa wrote:
[...]
> - at least one more architecture for rust.

Current state with llvm deters me to try to make clean and canonical
APKBUILD and patches for aarch64 and armv7 (maybe ppc64)  and I wait
till this (llvm status) will be solved.

To note, I have rust apk's for Alpine aarch64 and armv7 but they are not
canonical Alpine packages but I build with them some application like
firefox and some smaller, although didn't managed to build everything I
tried but didn't tried hard enough, probably.

If anyone have experience with building rust on aarch64 and armv7 please
reply to this mail here (or in private, however you like) and I'm ready
to share all my work on it, give it to someone more experienced, team
work or whatever.

-- 
regards 


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Simon Frankenberger
Details
Message ID
<430d21fc-3200-e7a0-8a12-adbee970cb18@fraho.eu>
In-Reply-To
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554315854
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On 03.04.2019 17:28, Natanael Copa wrote:
> Things that I would like to have included in 3.10:
> - openjdk9 and openjdk10?

From my side that's no problem and I'd really appreciate it. Openjdk9 is
already in testing and seems to run stable, Openjdk10 PR is opened and
OpenJDK11 is ready, but waiting for 10 to get merged.

The only issue with these packages is that they only build on 64 bit
arches natively, although cross-compiling seems to work without problems.

So, OpenJDK 9+10 (and most probably 11) builds fine on s390x, aarch64,
x86_64 and ppce64le (as far as I can see), but x86, armhf and armv7 fail
and I don't know why.

I'm currently trying to get the build running for at least x86, but for
the other arches I'm not sure what's happening there and how to fix /
debug it. My "infrastructure" is basicaly a bunch of shell scripts with
qemu-static binfmt emulation and there it works.

@Natanael: If you're OK to have java only for 64 bit (for now) then lets
get 9+10+11 into community asap :)

Thanks,
Simon
Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190403204229.7e38d83e@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To
<f249cb75f8a664f50cf3acb7d3d611b8@alpinelinux.org> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554316949
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 18:32:42 +0000
"Francesco Colista" <fcolista@alpinelinux.org> wrote:

> > Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?  
> 
> Any plan to promote wireguard from testing to community?

that is a good question. Let us bring that up again once the 3.10
builders are up and running.
 
> > Are there any other ABI breaking upgrades that requires lots of
> > rebuilds? We should try prioritize those too.  
> 
> qt5 from 5.12.1 to 5.12.2.

that will not break ABI, but would be nice to have updated before 3.10
release.

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190403204519.11f4ac41@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To
<430d21fc-3200-e7a0-8a12-adbee970cb18@fraho.eu> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554317119
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 20:24:14 +0200
Simon Frankenberger <simon@fraho.eu> wrote:
 
> @Natanael: If you're OK to have java only for 64 bit (for now) then lets
> get 9+10+11 into community asap :)

I think that makes sense. I think we only add 64bit and can evaluate
when/if someone ask for 32bit.

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190403204746.79e22779@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To
<20190403180821.GA16228@arya.arvanta.net> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554317266
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 20:08:21 +0200
Milan P. Stani* <mps@arvanta.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 17:28, Natanael Copa wrote:
> [...]
> > - at least one more architecture for rust.  
> 
> Current state with llvm deters me to try to make clean and canonical
> APKBUILD and patches for aarch64 and armv7 (maybe ppc64)  and I wait
> till this (llvm status) will be solved.

What is the issue with llvm? Is it tracked some where? is there a PR
for it?
 
> To note, I have rust apk's for Alpine aarch64 and armv7 but they are not
> canonical Alpine packages but I build with them some application like
> firefox and some smaller, although didn't managed to build everything I
> tried but didn't tried hard enough, probably.

That is great news. Then there is hope to have both aarch64 and armv7
support at least.
 
> If anyone have experience with building rust on aarch64 and armv7
> please reply to this mail here (or in private, however you like) and
> I'm ready to share all my work on it, give it to someone more
> experienced, team work or whatever.


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Taner Tas
Details
Message ID
<20190403225508.4728a201@alpine.terranova.org>
In-Reply-To
<20190403172825.5e8384b3@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554321308
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:28:25 +0200
Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:

> Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?

Bind-9.12 will be EOL in June. I think 3.10 must be shipped with Bind-9.14.
Maybe Samba 4.10 (or 4.9.5) too.

Regards.

--
Taner Tas


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Milan P. Stanić
Details
Message ID
<20190404103837.GA7262@arya.arvanta.net>
In-Reply-To
<20190403204746.79e22779@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554374317
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
[ no need for Cc, I'm subscribed to list ]

On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 20:47, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 20:08:21 +0200
> Milan P. Stani* <mps@arvanta.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 17:28, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > [...]
> > > - at least one more architecture for rust.  
> > 
> > Current state with llvm deters me to try to make clean and canonical
> > APKBUILD and patches for aarch64 and armv7 (maybe ppc64)  and I wait
> > till this (llvm status) will be solved.
> 
> What is the issue with llvm? Is it tracked some where? is there a PR
> for it?

https://github.com/alpinelinux/aports/pull/6071
community/rust: upgrade to 1.32.0

and
https://github.com/alpinelinux/aports/pull/6071#pullrequestreview-216341671
excerpt from this:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm trying to build rust with it and if everything ok, I will update
this pull request with llvm7
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't follow github much, so I'm not sure what all that means. Is the
llvm7 upgraded and built with mentioned patches?

Rust is still 1.31.1 version in aports but,
https://github.com/alpinelinux/aports/pull/6892
looks like llvm7 is patched/fixed.

Anyway, I will try to build rust 1.32.0 on x86_64 to see if this part is
solved and fixed.
  
> > To note, I have rust apk's for Alpine aarch64 and armv7 but they are not
> > canonical Alpine packages but I build with them some application like
> > firefox and some smaller, although didn't managed to build everything I
> > tried but didn't tried hard enough, probably.
> 
> That is great news. Then there is hope to have both aarch64 and armv7
> support at least.

I can build it with llvm6 but have some issue with 'abuild rootpkg'
which I don't understand quite well, and need help about that.
I can (maybe I will) build log somewhere if anyone are willing to review
and give suggestions or any help.
 
> > If anyone have experience with building rust on aarch64 and armv7
> > please reply to this mail here (or in private, however you like) and
> > I'm ready to share all my work on it, give it to someone more
> > experienced, team work or whatever.

-- 
regards


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Natanael Copa
Details
Message ID
<20190404125716.67b1d01e@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To
<20190403225508.4728a201@alpine.terranova.org> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554375436
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 22:55:08 +0300
Taner Tas <taner76@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:28:25 +0200
> Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:
> 
> > Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?  
> 
> Bind-9.12 will be EOL in June. I think 3.10 must be shipped with Bind-9.14.
> Maybe Samba 4.10 (or 4.9.5) too.

agree. bind should not be that problematic. samba upgrade may require
some work. I remember spending days to get the subpackages correct.

Maybe you could add tickets for those on bugs.alpinelinux.org? To
reduce the risk of forgetting.

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Alba Pompeo
Details
Message ID
<CAJDAfTBkC6Cgfv+AdBSRWsqFhT9SX5EiezFCjps7_wYgwiyAAA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<20190404125716.67b1d01e@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554422879
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
texlive failed to build after poppler upgrade and instead of getting
fixed ir was thrown into unmaintained.
https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports/commit/?id=80dfd3bc0b8abf08e612cf47b25b0564fdb04173
I hope it gets back into community before 3.10 release if possible.
In case the decision is to fully drop support, please post notice on
the release notes.

On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 7:57 AM Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 22:55:08 +0300
> Taner Tas <taner76@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:28:25 +0200
> > Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?
> >
> > Bind-9.12 will be EOL in June. I think 3.10 must be shipped with Bind-9.14.
> > Maybe Samba 4.10 (or 4.9.5) too.
>
> agree. bind should not be that problematic. samba upgrade may require
> some work. I remember spending days to get the subpackages correct.
>
> Maybe you could add tickets for those on bugs.alpinelinux.org? To
> reduce the risk of forgetting.
>
> -nc
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
> Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
> ---
>


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Leonardo Arena
Details
Message ID
<59873079-0a2c-40ce-ac05-178760b3eb70@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<CAJDAfTBkC6Cgfv+AdBSRWsqFhT9SX5EiezFCjps7_wYgwiyAAA@mail.gmail.com> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1554441868
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
We have one dev working on it. Hopefully should be back in community in time.

Thanks!

Il giorno 5 apr 2019, 02:08, alle ore 02:08, Alba Pompeo <albapompeo@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>texlive failed to build after poppler upgrade and instead of getting
>fixed ir was thrown into unmaintained.
>https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports/commit/?id=80dfd3bc0b8abf08e612cf47b25b0564fdb04173
>I hope it gets back into community before 3.10 release if possible.
>In case the decision is to fully drop support, please post notice on
>the release notes.
>
>On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 7:57 AM Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
>wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 22:55:08 +0300
>> Taner Tas <taner76@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:28:25 +0200
>> > Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Are there anything else we should try squeeze in?
>> >
>> > Bind-9.12 will be EOL in June. I think 3.10 must be shipped with
>Bind-9.14.
>> > Maybe Samba 4.10 (or 4.9.5) too.
>>
>> agree. bind should not be that problematic. samba upgrade may require
>> some work. I remember spending days to get the subpackages correct.
>>
>> Maybe you could add tickets for those on bugs.alpinelinux.org? To
>> reduce the risk of forgetting.
>>
>> -nc
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
>> Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
>> ---
>>
>
>
>---
>Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
>Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
>---
Tuan Hoang
Details
Message ID
<6ceb79ab-9863-3f3b-c82e-9e70148018e0@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To
<430d21fc-3200-e7a0-8a12-adbee970cb18@fraho.eu> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1556554668
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Thank you for the tremendous effort.

openjdk is such a monster, especially to build repeatedly. And/or
cross-building ...

Tuan

On 4/3/19 7:24 PM, Simon Frankenberger wrote:
> On 03.04.2019 17:28, Natanael Copa wrote:
>> Things that I would like to have included in 3.10:
>> - openjdk9 and openjdk10?
> 
> From my side that's no problem and I'd really appreciate it. Openjdk9 is
> already in testing and seems to run stable, Openjdk10 PR is opened and
> OpenJDK11 is ready, but waiting for 10 to get merged.
> 
> The only issue with these packages is that they only build on 64 bit
> arches natively, although cross-compiling seems to work without problems.
> 
> So, OpenJDK 9+10 (and most probably 11) builds fine on s390x, aarch64,
> x86_64 and ppce64le (as far as I can see), but x86, armhf and armv7 fail
> and I don't know why.
> 
> I'm currently trying to get the build running for at least x86, but for
> the other arches I'm not sure what's happening there and how to fix /
> debug it. My "infrastructure" is basicaly a bunch of shell scripts with
> qemu-static binfmt emulation and there it works.
> 
> @Natanael: If you're OK to have java only for 64 bit (for now) then lets
> get 9+10+11 into community asap :)
> 
> Thanks,
> Simon
> 



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---