Hi, On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 03:33:20PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
Apologies for the very long mail, hopefully just enough detail below. https://dsa.debian.org/ports/hardware-requirements/ and the port itself meets the ftp-master archive requirements; https://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-criteria.html The riscv64 port team will file a request against ftp.debian.org (with usertag arches) for inclusion of the port in the archive, linking to the arch qualification page, which should link to other RISC-V pages. https://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/riscv64 https://wiki.debian.org/RISC-V https://wiki.debian.org/Ports/riscv64 ;(doesn't exist yet) The archive admins will review this request and respond. Enough of the packages from the unofficial port of Debian unstable to be able to create buildds will be imported to the official port. Hardware for the buildds will be delivered to Debian hosting locations.
I have to figure it out clear here: Those riscv64 hardware machines for buildd must be shiped to Debian hosting locations? If so, could you offer more info about it? And how about portbox also? Poerbox should be controled by DSA.At first I thought it was the same way for debci team reomte accessing those riscv64 machines via stable network. These infos are what the sponsor expressly wants to know.
Thank you.
The buildds for the official port will be setup using those packages. The initially imported packages will be rebuilt, the rebuilds imported to the official port & the buildds will be updated to those packages. The rest of the archive will be rebuilt using the rebuilt packages. The port team will resolve any circular builds using manual builds with build profiles, the manual builds will be rebuilt etc. There is some documentation about this bootstrapping work on the Ports wiki. https://wiki.debian.org/Ports Once the rebuild is complete, then the port can proceed to qualifying for inclusion in the bookworm release. https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_policy.html https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_qualify.htmlFrom what I understand, there are buildd and porterbox machine deployed and fulfilled the hardware requirements correct?As I understand it, some of the buildds for the unofficial port are based on qemu on amd64 instead of RISC-V hardware, I think that is not acceptable for an official port, so those would need replacing, I'm not sure if they have been replaced entirely or not. I'm also not sure where they are hosted, usually new ones are setup (or old ones moved) for the official port in existing Debian hosting locations. https://wiki.debian.org/RISC-V#buildd_.28build-daemon.29_information There are no porterboxes according to this: https://wiki.debian.org/RISC-V#Porterboxes See this page for how to setup an unofficial porterbox: https://wiki.debian.org/PortsDocs/BuilddPorterboxSetupSo the next step is to ensure that packages builds are passing.The "Unofficial port" section of the new port docs links these: https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ftbfs.cgi?arch=riscv64 https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=riscv64&suite=sidWould it be possible and make sense to start a wanna-build server in our own company to start building stable or testing branch, deploy into an archive (not main archive), and run test internally in our company? Would this help to accelerate progress? The thought process is that if we can build the current stable/testing (bookworm or bullseye), we can see how many of the packages can be built using the stable/testing branch, and start testing?I think if you followed the procedure Debian will use that I mention above, then this seems like a useful exercise, but I think the priority should be in solving build failures (links above) and checking that the port is ready to meet the hardware/archive/release criteria. Since the initial official port will be based on the unofficial port of Debian unstable, definitely use unstable rather than stable/testing.From this page: https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_qualify.html, it looks like we'll need buildd-dsa for riscv64 as well correct?Right, this will happen during the switch from unofficial to official port, I think that as part of the process, enough hardware to rebuild the port and keep up with builds of unstable will be delivered to Debian hosting locations and setup by DSA, the unofficial buildds shut down and the port rebuilt on the official buildds.What would be the process on this? I looked up on https://dsa.debian.org/ but not much information. I should be sending a mail to debian-admin@lists.debian.org for more information?I'm not entirely sure, but I think that after the inclusion of riscv64 into the main archive is accepted, the riscv64 port team would file a ticket with DSA in the request-tracker to discuss hosting and hardware arrangements for the official riscv64 port. https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DSA/RTUsage https://wiki.debian.org/rt.debian.org -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
-- Best Regards,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature