Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc, etc.) That need to be set
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov < > martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Guillaume, >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard < >> guilla...@varnish-software.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> Thank you for that. >>> A few remarks and questions: >>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly >>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to >>> change very often. >>> >> >> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do! >> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and then >> builds all the Docker layers again and again. >> Here are the timings: >> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs >> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs >> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs >> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs >> 5) build packages >> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs >> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs >> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins >> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins >> >> >>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was >>> to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and >>> reproducibility, which we lose here. >>> >> >> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first >> CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it! >> >> >>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of >>> consistency? >>> >> >> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base >> Docker images. >> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64 >> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine). >> >> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request for >> more comments! >> >> Martin >> >> >>> >>> -- >>> Guillaume Quintard >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov < >>> martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov < >>>> martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov < >>>>> martin.grigo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Guillaume, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard < >>>>>> guilla...@varnish-software.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things: >>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in >>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache) >>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in >>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache) >>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below) >>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver ( >>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the >>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations: >>>>>>> - travis: >>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml >>>>>>> It's >>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> - circleci: >>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> the packaged platforms >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for >>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. >>>>>>> It's >>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take >>>>>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle >>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help! >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as >>>>> problems and possible solutions: >>>>> >>>>> 1) Circle CI >>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so >>>>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment >>>>> 1.2) possible solutions >>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build >>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via >>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds >>>>> and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build >>>>> steps >>>>> It will look something like >>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 >>>>> but >>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it. >>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be >>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker >>>>> images >>>>> >>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to >>>>> do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd >>>>> prefer. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with >>>> QEMU. >>>> >>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at >>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci >>>> and >>>> the build at >>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8 >>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!) >>>> ~40mins >>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and >>>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64. >>>> TODOs: >>>> - migrate Alpine >>>> >>> > Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with: > ... > automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they will > automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same > subdirectory > automake: of the corresponding sources. > automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities. > parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver' > lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS > multiply defined in condition TRUE ... > lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ... > 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here > lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/ > automake_boilerplate.am' included from here > + autoconf > + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh > + export CONFIG_SHELL > + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man' > --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings > --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking > --with-persistent-storage --quiet > configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are out > of date. > configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc > configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support > > Does anyone know a workaround ? > I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image > > Martin > > > >> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts >>>> - anything else that is still missing >>>> >>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile >>>> with a base image from the respective type. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2) Travis CI >>>>> 2.1) problems >>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle! >>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than >>>>> the current 'Docker' executor! >>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu >>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7. >>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu. >>>>> >>>>> 3) GitHub Actions >>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64 >>>>> runners >>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner >>>>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork >>>>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the >>>>> runner only for commits against >>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache >>>>> >>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ? >>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list >>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org >>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>
_______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
