Re: Getting rid of alignment faults in userspace
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 01:10:11PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: For ARM, we can achieve the goal by augmenting the default kernel command- line options: either alignment=3 Fix up each alingment fault, but also log the faulting address and name of the offending process to dmesg. alignment=5 Pass each alignment fault to the user process as SIGBUS (fatal by default) and log the faulting address and name of the offending process to dmesg. Fault statistics cat also be obtained at runtime by reading /proc/cpu/alignment. For other architectures, there may be other arch-specific ways of achieving something similar. Other architectures[1] use the 'prctl' tool, which uses the prctl(PR_SET_UNALIGN,...) kernel interface to control the unaligned trap behavior for the process. If this can be sanely togglable on ARM at runtime, it would be keen to use the same interface on this arch. HTH, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org [1] Originally ia64; historically ported to hppa and alpha; currently available in Debian unstable for ia64 and powerpc signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Bootchart analysis
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:32:21AM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 02:20:59PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:48:25PM -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote: 2) too many shells started to parse shell scripts I can see a lot of 'sh', 'cat', 'rm', 'sleep', 'run-parts', I think this could all be optimized. run-parts here is surprising; I'm not aware of anything that should call this in the normal boot sequence. The closest I can think of is update-motd, but that should only trigger as part of a login session, not with an autologin. I think digging into this further will turn up a bug... Is run-parts used to run legacy sysvinit scripts, or is that handled by something else? /etc/init.d/rc (and/or startpar) does its own sequencing of init scripts, run-parts is too generic to do the job. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Panda boards and 1GB of RAM.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ti-omap4/+bug/633227 seems to suggest we can now use 1GB of RAM on a Panda board. Creating a new image using the following images and hwpacks for my Panda : BOARD=panda linaro-media-create --rootfs ext4 --mmc /dev/mmcblk1 --binary linaro-n-developer-tar-20110426-0.tar.gz --hwpack hwpack_linaro-panda_20110426-0_armel_supported.tar.gz --dev panda I see that : root@linaro:~# uname -a Linux liliput-panda 2.6.38-1002-linaro-omap #3-Ubuntu SMP Fri Apr 15 14:00:54 UTC 2011 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux root@linaro:~# free -m total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem: 662538123 0 14494 -/+ buffers/cache: 30631 Swap:0 0 0 Is there something else that I'm missing here ? https://bugs.launchpad.net/linaro-image-tools/+bug/707047 This bug has been marked fix released for linaro-image-tools, but there has not been an update of linaro-image-tools in Ubuntu natty since February. If you use linaro-media-create from the bzr branch when writing to the SD card, you should see more memory available. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Libraries with NEON backends
Hi Konstantinos, On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:21:53AM +0300, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: On 28 March 2011 07:52, Jim Huang jim.hu...@linaro.org wrote: The problem is the zlib license, it forbids distributing compiled versions that are modified from the original source, such optimizations can go in the contrib folder, but it's of little use to the average user. There must be some misunderstanding here; no license that prohibited distribution of binaries built from modified source would be considered a Free Software license, and zlib is certainly considered free. :) The only relevant requirements in the license (according to /usr/share/doc/zlib1g/copyright) are: 1. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software. If you use this software in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be appreciated but is not required. 2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software. Are you looking at a different zlib license than this one? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: [PATCH] Dpkg/Shlibs.pm: multiarch search paths
Hi Hector, On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 05:43:19PM +, Hector Oron wrote: (Apologies for big attachment on previous email) 2011/3/21 Hector Oron hector.o...@gmail.com: 2011/3/21 Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com: the gcc-4.4 packaging is able to build a reverse cross. I didn't check gcc-4.5 and gcc-4.6. A test build on gcc-4.6 shows reverse build fails. See attached build-reverse-cross.log.txt Build with: $ dpkg-buildpackage -aarmel -rfakeroot -us -uc A non biarch test build on gcc-4.6 shows reverse build fails. See attached build-reverse-cross.log.txt Build with: $ DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH=yes dpkg-buildpackage -aarmel -rfakeroot -us -uc I tried the same builds on gcc-4.4 and gcc-4.5, compressed build logs attached. gcc-4.4 fails possibly related to cross gfortran support. gcc-4.5 seem to build fine. Your mail doesn't seem to have made it through to the Debian mailing lists, and it arrived at the linaro list with the attachments stripped (presumably for size). :( Can you post these logs on a website somewhere? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Getting rid of update-alternative in cross toolchain packages
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:00:04PM +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: Some time ago I looked at cross toolchain packages to find how they handle installation of several versions at same time. It was done by using 'update-alternatives' tool and was broken. We fixed it during Ubuntu/Maverick cycle but u-a is still in use (just versions are used now to take care of priority so latest gcc is default one). But this is different then native gcc which is selected by gcc-defaults package - /usr/bin/gcc is symlink to /usr/bin/gcc-DEFAULTVERSION (where DEFAULTVERSION value depends on architecture and distribution). Ok, we have gcc-defaults-armel-cross in Ubuntu but it takes care only of depending on default versions of cross toolchain components. I filled a bug [1] about it and discussed it with Matthias Klose. The proper way would consists those steps: - new cross packages will use u-a remove to get rid of old alternative stuff (in postinst and prerm) - new gcc-defaults-armel-cross package will provide /usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-APP symlinks - new gcc-defaults-armel-cross will also conflicts with older versions of cross toolchain packages From the bug report: 4. alter postinst/prerm of gcc-4.[45]-armel-cross to remove old u-a: TODO This should be done in the preinst instead. Rationale: update-alternatives is part of dpkg, so doesn't require any Pre-Depends; and a dependency (such as the gcc-arm-linux-gnueabi dependency on gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi) does not prevent one package from being unpacked before the postinst of another package it depends on has been run. So if you do this in the postinst, you get: - gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi unpacked (enforced by the Conflicts: from gcc-arm-linux-gnueabi) - gcc-arm-linux-gnueabi unpacked; overwrites /usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc symlink - gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi configured; u-a remove runs, removing the symlink - gcc-arm-linux-gnueabi configured - but the gcc symlink is now missing Otherwise, this looks ok. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Making linaro-nano smaller or Give Up Disk Space for Lent
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:01:46PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2011, Dave Martin wrote: As I understand it, debootstrap or germinate basically do the right thing. All we would need would be to document the use of the existing tools, and provide suitable ultra-minimal seeds (at the level of busybox+libc only) and/or an ultra-minimal --variant for debootstrap. So far, the two approaches which had been proposed were: * an initramfs-tools based initrd which would copy selected binaries manually; this probably gives a very minimal root image, but it's a bit cumbersome to manage for us * a classic seed based image; this is convenient to generate, but it's not particularly small The custom debootstrap script you're proposing is one way; I would also think we could consider the udeb route: udebs are meant to be small and used in Debian Installer which offers a rescue system. D-I also has fancy things like openssh, and can retrieve additional components from the network -- as long as they are udeb-ified. D-I images already exist as initrds today, with very small sizes; you can browse random image types under http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/main/installer-armel/current/images/ I'm not keen on this route because we are limited then to precisely that set of components that currently build udebs for inclusion in our image. We don't want to be in the position of having to add udebs to the archive in order to make changes to our nano image, that's just too high a barrier. We should be able to get an equivalent effect with an initramfs, which can reuse the existing .debs and extract contents as appropriate. The main thing this won't get us is building with -Os by default; I'm not sure how much that helps on armel, but I wouldn't expect it to offset the maintenance cost? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Making linaro-nano smaller or Give Up Disk Space for Lent
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 09:56:12AM +, David Gilbert wrote: 1) Is there agreement that for all the kernels we supply that we should change the policy for kernel configs to not default to everything on? (Maybe we should be using the upstream config with minimal modifications?) Pro: everyone benefits from the diet Con: Our kernel would be build slightly different than ubuntu's others: Can't we keep stuff configured as modules but move some of the modules out into other binary packages? That way everyone benefits from the diet, but it wouldn't stop anyone installing it if they had weird needs. I also don't think it would be a bad idea to propose making the same change to the Ubuntu kernels if you want to keep the differences down. I'd support turning the really obscure stuff off though, That involves a non-trivial amount of build engineering that isn't going to get done this cycle (and definitely not in the Ubuntu kernels). If we want to exclude a module completely, we can turn it off in the config; but if we want to build it and simply package it separately, that's a whole new build system layer that we have to deal with. It could probably reuse some of kernel-wedge's existing handling of module dependencies and so forth; but even so it's not achievable for this cycle. 2) Linaro-media-create shouldn't install linux-firmware_1.47_all.deb ? Do we have any any hardware that needs it? If so could there be a --nano option to not install it? Aren't there a few boards with PCI which could take a whole variety of boards some of which will need firmware? It's surprising just how many things need it, and if it was your ethernet adapter it's really nasty to fix. But I think I agree in generally it could be off by default. My thought here was USB rather than PCI. I think many of the boards have USB interfaces, and I think there's a non-zero number of USB devices that require externally-loaded firmware. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: purpose/description of various linaro snapshot images?
Hi Peter, On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 03:04:54PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: Hi. On snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/ there are now the following different kinds of snapshot image: linaro-alip/ linaro-developer/ linaro-graphical-engineering/ linaro-handset-plasma/ linaro-headless/ linaro-multimedia-engineering/ linaro-nano/ linaro-netbook-efl/ ...but I can't find anything on the wiki which documents what each of these images is actually for, which makes it hard to know which one to choose. The documentation is here: https://wiki.linaro.org/Releases There are two images that replace the linaro-headless image, depending on what you're looking for: the nano image, and the developer image. https://wiki.linaro.org/Releases/DailyBuilds suggests using linaro-headless, but that doesn't seem to have built since the 18th February. Jamie, will you update this wiki page to reflect the current reality? Please note that the headless and netbook-efl images will be replaced by the Nano and Evaluation Ubuntu Desktop builds soon but there hasn't been an official announcement that this happened -- is linaro-headless now gone, or has it just failed to build for the past fortnight? (If it has been obsoleted, how about a readme in 11.05-daily/linaro-headless/ saying try $elsewhere instead ?) Yes, it's gone. A readme redirect is a good idea, but I think there are some practical IS considerations that get in the way of doing this right now. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: [NOTES] 2/23 Linaro Developer Platform Weekly Status Meeting
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 09:11:28AM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: Enclosed you'll find a link to the agenda, notes and actions from the Linaro Developer Platforms Weekly Status meeting held on February 23rd in #linaro-meeting on irc.freenode.net at 16:00 UTC. https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/2011-02-23 Actions from the meeting where as follows: * tgall_foo and JamieBennett to get linaro-ubuntu building in Offspring * ppearse to investigate how libtool does ldopen for GObject Introspection work * slangasek, JamieBennett to shake the tree for developer image testing I did not discover until this morning that Mootbot didn't capture the entire log of the meeting and I am quite sure a couple of actions have been lost as a result. Please edit the page is you know of an action that should be there. From my logs, the new action was: * tgall_foo to press MM WG to confirm they understand the implications for 11.05 release to target libjpeg8 for work I can send you a copy of my IRC logs if it would help, though it won't be in moin markup. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: /latest link now active on snapshots.linaro.org
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:55:31PM +, Dave Martin wrote: So far, so good, but we still don't shapshort linaro-image-tools along with releases. This will become a problem because l-i-t evolves over time -- I've already had to start explaining to people how to check out old versions of l-i-t in order to make use of the linaro-m release images. Installing the (unsupported) linaro-m release for panda doesn't work with current l-i-t, for example. What error do you get in this case? The current version of l-i-t /is/ supposed to work for installing old linaro-m images, and if it doesn't that's something we should fix. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Announcing the Linaro porting jam
Hello, my fellow ARM aficionados! The Linaro Developer Platform Team is pleased to announce a new initiative to help improve the state of software on ARM: the ARM porting jam. Starting today, February 16th, we will be running a weekly IRC jam on Wednesdays from 1400-1800 UTC to bring developers together to work on all manner of userspace porting bugs, with the aim of fixing portability issues and getting the fixes delivered to our upstreams. An initial porting queue of known issues can be found here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=arm-porting-queue Interested in making the software in Ubuntu run better on ARM? Stop on by the #linaro channel on irc.linaro.org today! -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: problem with linaro-media-create
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 03:59:06PM +0100, Alexander Sack wrote: Since we only really support developer platform hosts with the tools ppa enabled, could we improve l-m-c to print a warning if that ppa isn't enabled? The other idea I had was to include the working qemu-arm-static in the tarball releases ... in that way things might even work on non-ubuntu platform. Well, given that Aneesh's original message mentioned he was downloading l-i-t directly from launchpad, my first thought was that he indeed wasn't running Ubuntu on the desktop. Aneesh, was this the case? What are you running on your desktop (distro, version)? Until we can work out how best to include static binaries in tarball releases, I think the fallback is to provide instructions on how to build the needed components from the qemu-linaro tarball releases. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Booting linux-linaro-2.6.37 on Beagle Board
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:35:45PM +0100, Alexander Sack wrote: 4. make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- menuconfig (enabled EARLY_PRINTK) 5. make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- uImage 6. make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- modules 7. make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- modules_install INSTALL_MOD_PATH=/media/rootfs 8. cp arch/arm/boot/uImage /media/boot; sync Everything went on smoothly. Then I put the SD card on BB and powered it on. I got a kernel panic: http://paste.ubuntu.com/560562 Please help me figuring out the problem. Is it because I didn't create uInitrd? If so, then how to create it for ARM? yes, you also need to update uInitrd if you use the default linaro boot cmdline. short intro is: 12:22 asac aviksil: cp /usr/bin/qem-arm-static /mnt/rootfs/usr/bin/ 12:22 asac aviksil: sudo chroot /mnt/rootfs 12:22 asac update-initramfs -kYOUR_KVERSION -c Right. More precisely, the problem here is that you have an initrd configured but it's an initrd for the *wrong* kernel. You can either replace this initrd with one that matches the kernel, or you can fix the boot commandline to not look for an initrd. (The latter assumes you have all the drivers built in that are needed to get to the rootfs - which *should* be the case here.) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: tcl8.5 breaks dpkg-cross assumptions and multiarch
Hi Wookey, On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 05:16:15PM +, Wookey wrote: Debian policy (8.2) says: --- It is recommended that supporting files and run-time support programs that do not need to be invoked manually by users, but are nevertheless required for the package to function, be placed (if they are binary) in a subdirectory of /usr/lib, preferably under /usr/lib/package-name. If the program or file is architecture independent, the recommendation is for it to be placed in a subdirectory of /usr/share instead, preferably under /usr/share/package-name. Following the package-name naming convention ensures that the file names change when the shared object version changes. Files and support programs only useful when compiling software against the library should be included in the development package for the library --- A maintainer reading the above could reasonably decide that /usr/share was the right place for this file, because the file itself (being just shell) is arch-independent. The problem is that the contents are arch-dependent. Policy is not at all clear on this distinction (It's been making my head hurt all day). For multiarch, or existing dpkg-cross cross-compiling, to work, arch-dependent needs to mean either form _or_ content (see below for elaboration). I disagree that this would be a reasonable thing for the maintainer to do. The current policy language talks about architecture-dependence of the *file*, not of a file *format*, and there are obviously file formats that are architecture-independent but contain architecture-specific data that must therefore be part of an architecture: any package. So I think this is a clear policy violation in the existing tcl8.5-dev package; even if 8.2 doesn't prohibit the current behavior, the FHS surely does.[1] So I think your filing of bug #611650 was the correct course of action and the maintainer appears to agree. That said, I'm also happy to second patches to policy that clarify the wording and save maintainers from thinking it's ok to ship such files under /usr/share when it isn't. So, the questions is - which of these is the correct fix: 1) make dpkg-cross copy over symlinks even when they point into /usr/share 2) make tcl8.5 put tclConfig.sh in /usr/lib/tcl8.5 instead of /usr/share/tcltk/tcl8.5 3) make sqlite (and similar packages) look in /usr/share/tcltk/tcl8.5 instead of /usr/lib/tcl8.5 when building 1+2: dpkg-cross should also copy over symlinks that point to /usr/share. When such symlinks exist, it's almost invariably because *something is looking for the information in that location*. So as a general policy, they should also be made available in a crossed package. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org [1] /usr/share : Architecture-independent data signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: l-m-c console arguments
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 01:04:45AM +0200, Amit Kucheria wrote: I just tried to create an SD image for the beagle with l-m-c from bzr. The kernel command-line ends up containing 'console=tty0 console=NONE,115200n8'. Board configuration problem? Overriding l-m-c with --console ttyO2 doesn't work since it is added before the other consoles, so doesn't end up getting input. Shouldn't it be the last console added in the list? Bug #710971, multiply-reported and actively being worked on via IRC. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: New problem with BeagleBoard
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:28:51AM +0200, Ira Rosen wrote: I am still not able to make the board work. With a new SD card, we are getting the same problem. ./linaro-media-create --mmc /dev/mmcblk0 Is this the correct target device name? SD card readers on laptops and desktops normally show up as SCSI disks; e.g., /dev/sdb What is the output of this linaro-media-create command? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Linaro Foundations Team Weekly Report (2010-12-02 to 2010-12-08)
The weekly report for the Linaro Foundations team may be found at: Status report: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/2010-12-08 Overall status (out of date until workitem tracker for 11.05 is available): https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/Status * A first 2.6.37 kernel is now packaged and available in Ubuntu natty for inclusion in Linaro images. * Cross-compiler packages have been merged and uploaded to natty, preparing us for gcc 4.5 as a default cross-compiler. * Progress on ALIP continues, with all but two of the original ALIP packages now successfully cross-buildable with patches applied. Actions: * npitre to write up more formal documentation of what our kernel tree is (and isn't): DONE * slangasek to review armel-cross-toolchain-base merge request: DONE -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: New problem with BeagleBoard
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:43:30AM -0200, Guilherme Salgado wrote: I thought this old hwpack could be to blame, but I can't reproduce the error you saw with an image created using that hwpack. Anyway, there are newer hwpacks in http://snapshots.linaro.org/10.11-daily/linaro-hwpacks/ which you might want to use in the future. Better yet, I think, would be to use http://releases.linaro.org/platform/linaro-m/hwpacks/final/ :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Call for testing: Linaro 10.11 FINAL
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 08:52:22AM +, Jamie Bennett wrote: We are just one day away from the Linaro 10.11 release and with a bit of luck, a strong down-wind and lots of testing from the community we can release on time and in good shape. If you have the required hardware available *please* test the final image candidates which can be found as follows: Headless (console only) image: http://snapshots.linaro.org/10.11-daily/linaro-headless/20101108/2 ALIP image: This should also be: http://snapshots.linaro.org/10.11-daily/linaro-alip/20101109/0/ The 20101108 build was a last attempt to bring the ALIP size down for release, but it failed to include a few critical components like a web browser. So please test with 20101109 instead. Please select the 20101109 hwpack for your board at: http://snapshots.linaro.org/10.11-daily/linaro-hwpacks/ The 20101109 hardware pack for imx51 is known not to work out of the box; a new 20101110 hardware pack is being built now with an updated u-boot. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Pull request for OMAP3/4 fixes
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:41:18PM +0530, Anand Gadiyar wrote: The following patches are a bunch of OMAP-related fixes. In summary these patches: - allow omap3_defconfig and omap_4430sdp_defconfig to build and boot - get MMC (somewhat) working on Panda board - fix a bug that caused all 3630s to be reported as ES1.2 (highly unlikely that these are available in the wild) Except for Catalin's patch, all of them were cherry-picked from mainline. I hope I'm not too late to get these merged. No problem with merging, but just to let you know, this lands too late to include in the omap3 hardware packs for the 10.11 release. The cutoff for patches to the linaro linux kernel packages for 10.11 was 21 October. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
lin...@uds schedule available
Hi everyone, The day-by-day schedule for lin...@uds is now available for viewing: https://wiki.linaro.org/Events/2010-10-LDS#Session%20Schedule To get the most out of your lin...@uds experience you are strongly encouraged to look at the schedule before this event and register your interest in specific sessions, as described here: https://wiki.linaro.org/Events/2010-10-LDS#Before%20the%20event Subscribing to sessions is helpful because you can then use the Hide talks that aren't for me button to get a view of where you want to be when. Linaro assignees will have already been subscribed to some sessions by their technical leads where their participation is required, but all attendees should feel welcome to participate in any sessions! * Scheduling conflicts * If there is a session that it's important that you participate in directly that is scheduled before your arrival or after your departure, or if two sessions are scheduled at the same time and you need to be present for both of them, indicate this by marking yourself as participation essential for each of these sessions and make sure that your arrival and departure times are correctly recorded in your lin...@uds registration: https://edge.launchpad.net/sprints/uds-n/+attend Please don't use this lightly. We have a whole week packed full of interesting topics, and it's impossible for any of us to attend all the sessions that we want to; that's why we have session minutes and wiki specs afterwards, to help people catch up with discussions they couldn't be present for. You should only mark yourself participation essential where it would be important for us to reschedule a session around your requirements. And please get any such requests into the system before the end of day on Friday. We are unlikely to be able to accomodate schedule change requests once the conference has started. See you all next week in Florida! -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: bzr on linaro
Hi Xianghua, On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:24:16AM -0500, Xianghua Xiao wrote: I'm new here and have a dumb question: why is linaro using bzr while nearly the whole linux-related projects are either using or switching to git? This is a frequently repeated idea, but I think it's an exaggeration. It's true that git is popular, but both CVS and subversion are still widely used for many projects, and both bzr and mercurial are continuing to grow in use. Proponents of git tend to repeat this idea that everyone will soon be using git. Many of these proponents are kernel developers; from their perspective, it often seems that everyone is *already* using git. :) And unfortunately there isn't much survey data to tell us what the real market share (or mind share) of the different VCSes is; but at least one attempt at finding data shows that bzr usage is growing much faster than git usage: http://bazaarvcs.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/bazaar-adoption-growing-strongly/ Now, to answer your real question. :) Linaro uses bzr in large part because Linaro uses Launchpad, and Launchpad integrates with bzr (and it does not integrate with git). Some of us on the Linaro team also have a personal preference for bzr, so this works out nicely for us - but it's not something that we're religious about. For collaborating with certain upstream projects, such as the kernel and u-boot, it's clear that using git is the appropriate choice; that's why we have git.linaro.org. For new work in Linaro, such as our platform and infrastructure tools, bzr is the better choice because of the integration with Launchpad. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Linaro Foundations Team Weekly Report (2010-09-30 to 2010-10-06)
The weekly report for the Linaro Foundations team may be found at: Status report: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/2010-10-06 Overall status: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/Status * Backports of the Linaro gcc packages to Ubuntu 10.04 LTS are now available at http://people.canonical.com/~hrw/ubuntu-lucid-armel-cross-compilers/ * Most Linaro kernel patches from this cycle have now been accepted upstream, including the patches implementing kernel security features for ARM. * ALIP cross-building has reached an important milestone this week, with a cross-buildable gstreamer package pushed to the PPA at https://launchpad.net/~peter-pearse/+archive/cross-source Actions: * hrw, ppearse to follow up on what's needed to build flavored cross-compilers for ppa * JamieBennett to ask Anmar about improving http://www.linaro.org/about-linaro/ * slangasek to nudge Keybuk to review bootchart changes rather than redirecting to upstream, since Ubuntu and upstream are quite out of sync -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Linaro Foundations Team Weekly Report (2010-09-16 to 2010-09-22)
The weekly report for the Linaro Foundations team may be found at: Status report: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/2010-09-22 Overall status: https://wiki.linaro.org/Releases/FoundationsStatus Work continues on bugfixing for the 10.11 release, as well as some spec work not affecting the archive. The burndown chart at http://people.canonical.com/~pitti/workitems/maverick/linaro-foundations.html shows that we are on target to complete remaining engineering work for the 10.11 release. Actions: * hrw to target bug #615765 to debhelper instead of binutils, with explanation * lool to solicit toolchain WG input on bug #615765 * hrw,ppearse to discuss possible versioning problem blocking PPA uploads * dmart to test that linux-linaro-tools package in maverick DTRT * marketing to write a 'what is linaro for dummies' * slangasek to post DebConf 10 gobby notes publically * slangasek to nudge Keybuk to review bootchart changes rather than redirecting to upstream, since Ubuntu and upstream are quite out of sync Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Using Live Helper to Build Arm Images
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:34:58AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Tom Gall tom.g...@linaro.org wrote: I've created a wiki page at https://wiki.linaro.org/LiveHelper/Hacking to describe the various steps for building your own linaro images on arm hardware using live helper. This also includes the steps to modifying seeds to add/subtrack packages to suite your own goals whatever they might be. Maybe this should be merged with https://wiki.linaro.org/Source/ImageBuilding or maybe a Source/ImageHacking page? I see that the LiveHelper/Hacking page actually covers seed hacking as well. The live-helper hacking information looks to me like it should go under Source/ImageBuilding, indeed; where should we put the information about seeds? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Linaro Foundations Team Weekly Report (2010-09-23 to 2010-09-29)
The weekly report for the Linaro Foundations team may be found at: Status report: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/2010-09-29 Overall status: https://wiki.linaro.org/Releases/FoundationsStatus * This week, Avik Sil joins us from IBM as a new assignee to the team. Welcome, Avik! * With the Linaro 10.11 freeze in effect and the Ubuntu maverick release a week away, much of the team's focus has shifted to resyncing with upstream, with the exception of work around ALIP and xdeb, where development continues at a steady pace. * This week also saw the inclusion of both the 4.4 and 4.5 versions of Linaro GCC in the OpenEmbedded archive, thanks to the initiative of Marcin Juszkiewicz. Actions: * JamieBennett to ask Anmar about improving http://www.linaro.org/about-linaro/ * hrw to target bug #615765 to debhelper instead of binutils, with explanation * lool to solicit toolchain WG input on bug #615765 * hrw,ppearse to discuss possible versioning problem blocking PPA uploads * dmart to test that linux-linaro-tools package in maverick DTRT * slangasek to post DebConf 10 gobby notes publically * slangasek to nudge Keybuk to review bootchart changes rather than redirecting to upstream, since Ubuntu and upstream are quite out of sync -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: the linaro toolchain and older arm versions
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 04:23:01PM -0600, John Rigby wrote: Thanks Michael. Just wanted to make sure I understood. The do no harm goal and the Thumb2 libgcc seem to be somewhat contradictory however. I realize that choices need to be made and only odd ducks like me will likely run into issues. My particular case is wanting to build u-boot for old and new ARM chips with the same gcc. U-Boot has its own libgcc that I can use as a work around. However, the harm here comes not from any work the Linaro Toolchain WG is doing, it comes from the fact that you're using the Ubuntu toolchain packages, where ARMv7 is targeted as the baseline - and this was the case even before Linaro was off the ground. :) (Even if libgcc were not Thumb2 enabled, you could still have arbitrary, if more subtle, compatibility problems with the Ubuntu armel libgcc and non-ARMv7 chips.) It sounds like what you need for this is a multilib-enabled armel compiler build, that includes a libgcc build for ARMv7 as well as separate libgcc builds for whichever other ARM targets you're after. You should coordinate this with Marcin (cc:ed), who can help with the toolchain packaging details for either a native or cross- compiler. OOI, what are the U-Boot targets you're looking to build for that don't support ARMv7? A gcc multilib package for armel will be easy to implement but hard to maintain, and certainly none of the systems Linaro is targeting should require a pre-Thumb-2 U-Boot, so I'm very doubtful that the ongoing effort to maintain such a toolchain in Ubuntu is justified (unless we find that it becomes substantially easier with multiarch, I guess, but we're a ways away from that yet). Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Override dh_gencontrol architecture
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:33:59AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
I'm working on building in ARM cross compile support to the Ubuntu
kernel packaging. I am encountering the following error:
fakeroot debian/rules binary-omap arch=armel
.
dh_gencontrol -plinux-image-2.6.35-22-omap
dpkg-gencontrol: error: current host architecture 'amd64' does not
appear in package's architecture list (armel)
dh_gencontrol: dpkg-gencontrol -plinux-image-2.6.35-22-omap
-ldebian/changelog -Tdebian/linux-image-2.6.35-22-omap.substvars
-Pdebian/linux-image-2.6.35-22-omap returned exit code 255
make: *** [binary-omap] Error 9
I have not successfully found a way to override the architecture. Anyone
have any ideas? I've tried the various forms of
dh_gencontrol -p$(pkgimg) -a$(arch)
dh_gencontrol -p$(pkgimg) -- -a$(arch)
export DH_OPTIONS=-a$(arch) dh_gencontrol -p$(pkgimg)
Cross-building of Debian packages is meant to be handled by using the
'dpkg-buildpackage -a${target_arch}' interface. This sets the environment
variables shown in the output of 'dpkg-architecture -a${target_arch}'.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Override dh_gencontrol architecture
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:22:52AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
Cross-building of Debian packages is meant to be handled by using the
'dpkg-buildpackage -a${target_arch}' interface. This sets the environment
variables shown in the output of 'dpkg-architecture -a${target_arch}'.
Do you have an example of a package that correctly cross builds?
Sure, u-boot-linaro is one. Many other packages do also, requiring nothing
more than passing $(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE) to ./configure. I guess the kernel
case is a bit more complex.
The issue I'm having with the kernel is that there are some native gcc
steps that compile tools executed during the build as well as some cross
compile steps. If I can correctly determine the schroot host arch as well
as the target arch, then I think I can accommodate the various compile
steps.
I would be surprised if you need to pass the native architecture into the
kernel build anywhere, since for the compile tools we should just use gcc.
Probably just checking for equality between the host and build archs is
sufficient? So something like
ifneq ($(DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE),$(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE))
archs=$(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)
endif
in debian/rules - but that's not quite right, and I can't see at a glance
where the $(arch) variable used in debian/rules is being set.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: New projects and copyright
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:54:57AM +0800, Liu Hui-R64343 wrote: Here is the info: - Company Details Name Registered Office: LINARO LIMITED 110 FULBOURN ROAD CAMBRIDGE CAMBRIDGESHIRE CB1 9NJ Company No. 07180318 Status: Active Date of Incorporation: 05/03/2010 Country of Origin: United Kingdom Thanks, I've updated the wiki page to list 'Linaro Limited' as the copyright holder. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Error (no boot device found) running qemu image
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:34:15AM -0300, Guilherme Salgado wrote: On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 09:22 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: On Wed, Sep 15, 2010, Guilherme Salgado wrote: qemu: hardware error: no boot device found Could you share the QEMU cmdline you're using and which version of QEMU you're using? This error in the case of the omap3 emulation is usually when the partition table isn't correct, or MLO is missing from the first vfat. Ah, then please make sure you're using an up-to-date linaro-media-create; the handling of x-loader in the headless images has been changed as of yesterday, so you need a matching l-m-c that knows how to extract MLO from the right location in the tarball and install it to the vfat partition when generating the image. I was running it from the trunk branch, so I had the most recent version of it at that time. Could it have been fixed after I tried? This was fixed in revision 89 on September 15th - so yes, it's possible. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Hardware pack questions
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 09:16:15AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: Is it intended that pre-release hwpacks will be long-lived? I expected the same rules to apply as to pre-release images: ephemeral objects used during development that would be replaced at release time by images built from the final archive, leaving no lingering obligation to provide easy access to source for images we're no longer distributing. Are the hwpacks not going to follow this same release cycle? Right, I think legally we might really not be required to do this; however, technically it still makes sense to me to have the sources used to produce a certain hwpack. Especially since we use ppa's or some other archives for hwpacks which have no guarantees to keep history etc. Yes, if we're going to be building hwpacks out of ppas, getting the sources out of the PPA afterwards would be a problem; so best to keep them with the hwpack. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: Linaro and ARMv5
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 07:01:50PM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: Note that Debian does maintain a v5 build at the moment; if they transition to using the Linaro toolchain for their armel build then it may be the best possible scenario for v5 validation. I'm copying Matthias who may have more information on the current status of that project. Debian is currently targeting v4t rather than v5. There was a recent discussion on debian-arm about bumping the compat baseline to v5, and the consensus seemed to be that there wasn't enough performance improvement to justify the effort and the loss of compatibility with some widely-deployed v4t developer kit. But as long as the goal is to have something that can /run/ on v5 hw (as opposed to something that runs /optimally/ on v5 hw), Debian fits the bill. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
