Subject: Re: Building unofficial packages on Alpine build infrastructure?
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0BDCBD0E-9D5D-4CDE-BEFF-BCC7E619CBAD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha384
From: Jakub Jirutka <jakub@jirutka.cz>
In-Reply-To: <55293c01-cd18-19c0-1380-b0ce96a146d0@bitmessage.ch>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 16:49:05 +0100
Cc: William Pitcock <nenolod@dereferenced.org>,
 alpine-infra@lists.alpinelinux.org
Message-Id: <E85E0CFC-6981-4882-95F4-3F14168E7B78@jirutka.cz>
References: <514355cb-b6f1-c220-99fc-b096dcb0b693@bitmessage.ch> <CA+T2pCFsduoT_cX5K=5Ngv-B0Ko2-0iViSS0VPo=WC9FykhJQw@mail.gmail.com> <55293c01-cd18-19c0-1380-b0ce96a146d0@bitmessage.ch>
To: Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid@bitmessage.ch>


--Apple-Mail=_0BDCBD0E-9D5D-4CDE-BEFF-BCC7E619CBAD
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

Hi

> =46rom what I have learned from various comments on our project is, =
that the people who say =E2=80=9Ebut it does not make calls yet=E2=80=9C =
would be the same ones who say "but it doesn't have a UI yet" and then =
go on with jokes about making phone calls with emacs and what not=E2=80=A6=


Exactly my thoughts! I think that I=E2=80=99m not the only one who =
consider this comment quite unfair from William. Actually most of his =
response was more or less about questioning postmarketOS=E2=80=A6 But I =
don=E2=80=99t have much information about it, so maybe it was valid, I =
can=E2=80=99t judge. What changed my mind was not his response, but only =
Awilfox=E2=80=99s; she works for William, but unlike him she provided =
very comprehensive technical arguments.

Anyway, I=E2=80=99d like to add this: It may seem that =E2=80=9Cmaking a =
phone call=E2=80=9D is the most important feature on mobile phones, but =
that=E2=80=99s not exactly right nowadays, is it? Many people, including =
me, would be very happy to have mobile device running Alpine with =
working network stack just to use it as PDA and don=E2=80=99t mind =
carrying good old so-called =E2=80=9Cstupid=E2=80=9D phone just for =
calling (or maybe use some app for calls). We can=E2=80=99t say the same =
about missing GUI. Since CLI is unusable on todays so-called =E2=80=9Csmar=
t=E2=80=9D phones due to missing keyboard, mobile device without GUI =
would be totally useless for users. (Note: Of course I know that =
software should be built from bottom to up, that=E2=80=99s not the point =
here.)

Do you really need the latest KDE version, i.e. LTS version is not =
usable for postmarketOS? In that case I=E2=80=99d suggest to take =
abuilds from Ad=C3=A9lie Linux, update them to the latest version / =
merge with yours, and maintain your own aports repository with these =
packages. Running aports repository itself is quite simple.

> The idea is to use abuild *on the phone* to download and verify the =
blobs and build the firmware package, then install that cleanly with =
apk.

Why? Alpine is a binary distribution, packages should be built on =
builders, not end-user machines. It looks quite odd for me to build =
packages right on the *phone* (and I used Gentoo for 5 years, still =
building pkgs on a phone doesn=E2=80=99t look like a good idea for me). =
Why you can=E2=80=99t download and verify these blobs on builders, =
package them as signed apk packages and use just apk on a phone to =
install them?

> So I=E2=80=99ve tried to politely ask with this post if Alpine would =
like to build postmarketOS packages, or not (which is answered now).

I have some x86_64 24-cores 64 GiB RAM machine which I can possible =
provide you for building packages. Unfortunately I don=E2=80=99t have =
any physical aarch64 and armhf machines. But we might try to run it with =
QEMU emulation; it will be slow, but better than nothing.
I=E2=80=99ll ask some people if I can get some aarch64 machine.

Jakub

> On 29. Oct 2017, at 13:27, Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid@bitmessage.ch> =
wrote:
>=20
>> why a phone OS distribution is concentrating on KDE when they haven't =
even managed to check off the "makes phone calls" tickbox yet.
>=20
> =46rom what I have learned from various comments on our project is, =
that the people who say "but it does not make calls yet" would be the =
same ones who say "but it doesn't have a UI yet" and then go on with =
jokes about making phone calls with emacs and what not (which I do find =
pretty funny). postmarketOS is far from ready for being a daily driver =
and we're trying to be upfront with that basically everywhere (on the =
homepage, in every blog post, in github, in the wiki, ... - suggestions =
on how we can improve that are welcome).
>=20
> There are people working on the plasma stack, because that is what =
interests them. I don't see any point in saying: "No, everyone must work =
on the telephony stack first." Personally I try support all efforts that =
bring the project forward, in one direction or another (tablets and =
using old phones as raspberry pis with sensors built in are fine use =
cases as well, that can also save the devices from being useless and =
thrown away). And I'm trying to see where we are blocked and push in =
that direction so we can move forward.
>=20
> A binary repository is one of them, it would make the life of all =
contributors much easier (some contributors don't have access to fast =
CPUs and compiling kernels already takes hours for them), that's why I'd =
like to have a solution for that rather sooner than later.
>=20
> So I've tried to politely ask with this post if Alpine would like to =
build postmarketOS packages, or not (which is answered now). And also =
only because making this possible was suggested by Alpine developers in =
the first place, I would not have asked otherwise.
>=20
>> At least, any firmware I would be loading into my phone, I would want
>> to be delivered to me in a signed package, not downloaded at install
>> time.
>=20
> The idea is to use abuild *on the phone* to download and verify the =
blobs and build the firmware package, then install that cleanly with =
apk. If you are interested in this topic and have the time to spare, I =
would be happy if you reviewed the idea in the GitHub issue (also =
regarding Alpine policy and how we could make it conform to that).
>=20
> Best regards,
> Oliver
>=20
>=20
> William Pitcock:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Oliver Smith
>> <ollieparanoid@bitmessage.ch> wrote:
>>> Dear Alpinists,
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> 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".
>>=20
>> Yes, I have indeed proposed this.
>> But the new build infrastructure is not yet in place.
>>=20
>>> 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 Ad=C3=A9lie, we're currently upstreaming KDE), instead =
of
>>> duplicating the effort.
>>=20
>> I proposed that we (Adelie and pmOS) might work together, but
>> unfortunately our requirements are incompatible (LTS vs. non-LTS
>> KDE).[1]
>>=20
>>> 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]).
>>>=20
>>> Thoughts?
>>=20
>> Well, I mean, I don't want to tell you what to do, but it seems
>> foolish to use a package manager which can cryptographically verify
>> package contents just to download a script which downloads the real
>> files.
>> At least, any firmware I would be loading into my phone, I would want
>> to be delivered to me in a signed package, not downloaded at install
>> time.
>> Not to mention that packages which download files in their
>> post-install scripts are a violation of Alpine policy.
>>=20
>> William
>>=20
>> [1]: Since we're using footnotes, I might ponder out loud why a phone
>> OS distribution is concentrating on KDE when they haven't even =
managed
>> to check off the "makes phone calls" tickbox yet.[2]
>> [2]: While I am not involved in sysadmin tasks around here, I am
>> pretty sure that any such collaboration on buildserver usage would be
>> dependent on the derivative proving it's viability first.  See also
>> checking off the "makes phone calls" tickbox.
>>=20
>=20


--Apple-Mail=_0BDCBD0E-9D5D-4CDE-BEFF-BCC7E619CBAD
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCQAdFiEEwlgOtm6+gnC7W+06PZeHr2nsdbkFAln1+HEACgkQPZeHr2ns
dbkn+ggAvG+k1vWdciFrcUnMSTXSa7zz1z0CDPy0+7TCWG3Vuui6ZkBEE4l1CdNp
D0n/RTdoZrnDbwHTeJDv/u2FjDltwJyFvkpJEJczmbYm11GHELfCzd/ancqew10q
vzBtChdb3bHi2anGYxAGUrdWXQNC6qSD1XdCegjP5XS0U6h4LfCt8ooBN7dV5gSN
srjTZKR8QJ2CzTtR8ND0UJqirJ3Sy86IuEKJ9Zbfwqm2Ex8+AZEe+5BnyCk4B2ZZ
2QImrcbNoG5i14eR+kq+3pyYyTEw8O15Won7L+PmTXE4VfikGFvjGTUditaTJ3TV
Pg53fIQIeIdC8FD/fKl6pz+lK4IVxw==
=dkU9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_0BDCBD0E-9D5D-4CDE-BEFF-BCC7E619CBAD--