Supported host distro updates

Supported host distro updates

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi all,

With the release coming up fairly soon, it's time to look at updating our 
supported distro list. Currently we have the following (in meta-
yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf):

SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS ?= " \
            Yocto (Built by Poky 7.0) 1.2 \n \
            Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS \n \
            Ubuntu 11.10 \n \
            Ubuntu 12.04 LTS \n \
            Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS \n \
            Fedora release 15 (Lovelock) \n \
            Fedora release 16 (Verne) \n \
            Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) \n \
            CentOS release 5.6 (Final) \n \
            CentOS release 5.7 (Final) \n \
            CentOS release 6.2 (Final) \n \
            Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.4 (squeeze) \n \
            openSUSE 11.4 \n \
            openSUSE 12.1 \n \
	    "

I think we should drop at least Fedora 15. What do we want to do with CentOS? 
I've been using 6.3 here on my build machine for some time with no ill effects. 
I believe we have some interest in preserving 5.x; should we be adding 6.3 and 
removing 6.2? What about the rest?

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Burton, Ross]

On 24 September 2012 12:10, Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>             Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.4 (squeeze) \n \

The latest stable is 6.0.5, so someone keep up to date with Debian
Stable will get the warning (it's just a roll-up release of security
and critical fixes).

Ross

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Trevor Woerner]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>             openSUSE 11.4 \n \
>             openSUSE 12.1 \n \

openSUSE 12.2 was released on September 5th. I have been using it
since around then and haven't found any issues. Is there some defacto
test I can run to definitively say 12.2 works fine with Yocto?

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday 24 September 2012 12:29:07 Trevor Woerner wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Paul Eggleton
> 
> <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >             openSUSE 11.4 \n \
> >             openSUSE 12.1 \n \
> 
> openSUSE 12.2 was released on September 5th. I have been using it
> since around then and haven't found any issues. Is there some defacto
> test I can run to definitively say 12.2 works fine with Yocto?

IIRC, when we tested the 12.2 pre-release we found we were unable to support 
it due to the following bug:

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2201

If that is definitely fixed and builds run through OK, we should be able to add 
it to our host distro tests and declare it supported.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Saul Wold]

On 09/24/2012 04:10 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With the release coming up fairly soon, it's time to look at updating our
> supported distro list. Currently we have the following (in meta-
> yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf):
>
> SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS ?= " \
>              Yocto (Built by Poky 7.0) 1.2 \n \
Will want to ensure this is updated to the correct Yocto version also, 
maybe both N and N-1.

Sau!

>              Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS \n \
>              Ubuntu 11.10 \n \
>              Ubuntu 12.04 LTS \n \
>              Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS \n \
>              Fedora release 15 (Lovelock) \n \
>              Fedora release 16 (Verne) \n \
>              Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) \n \
>              CentOS release 5.6 (Final) \n \
>              CentOS release 5.7 (Final) \n \
>              CentOS release 6.2 (Final) \n \
>              Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.4 (squeeze) \n \
>              openSUSE 11.4 \n \
>              openSUSE 12.1 \n \
> 	    "
>
> I think we should drop at least Fedora 15. What do we want to do with CentOS?
> I've been using 6.3 here on my build machine for some time with no ill effects.
> I believe we have some interest in preserving 5.x; should we be adding 6.3 and
> removing 6.2? What about the rest?
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Paul Eggleton
> <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>             openSUSE 11.4 \n \
>>             openSUSE 12.1 \n \
>
> openSUSE 12.2 was released on September 5th. I have been using it
> since around then and haven't found any issues. Is there some defacto
> test I can run to definitively say 12.2 works fine with Yocto?
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

FWIW I have been build testing on (to be) Ubuntu 12.10/32bit without any issues.

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Trevor Woerner]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> IIRC, when we tested the 12.2 pre-release we found we were unable to support
> it due to the following bug:
>
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2201

As you mentioned, this was on a pre-release milestone, 6 months before
the final release.

> If that is definitely fixed and builds run through OK, we should be able to add
> it to our host distro tests and declare it supported.

I just did a fresh test of the quick-start guide and saw a bunch of
warnings, but the build itself completed successfully:

Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION        = "1.15.3"
TARGET_ARCH       = "i586"
TARGET_OS         = "linux"
MACHINE           = "qemux86"
DISTRO            = "poky"
DISTRO_VERSION    = "1.2+snapshot-20120924"
TUNE_FEATURES     = "m32 i586"
TARGET_FPU        = ""
meta
meta-yocto
meta-yocto-bsp    = "master:88429f018bbb15749f31067d5e7bf33c21b15f92"

NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies
NOTE: Preparing runqueue
NOTE: Executing SetScene Tasks
NOTE: Executing RunQueue Tasks
NOTE: validating kernel configuration
find: warning: -path
/home/trevor/devel/yocto/gitrepo-method/build/tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/linux-yocto-3.4.10+git1+c5bddf8ea379406ffec550528e17b777a0eba24b_1+59c3ff750831338d05ab67d5efd7fc101c451aff-r4.3/linux/
will not match anything because it ends with /.
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.0.1, installed in the
base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr):
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xdead1000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.0.1, installed in the
base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr):
libgthread-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0 (0xdead2000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.0.1, installed in the
base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr):
libffi.so.6 => /usr/lib/libffi.so.6 (0xdead3000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.0.1, installed in the
base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr):
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xdead4000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/udev/udev-acl, installed in the
base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr):
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xdead2000)
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 1537 tasks of which 1224 didn't need to
be rerun and all succeeded.

Summary: There were 6 WARNING messages shown.

So unless those warnings are host-related I think it's safe to say
openSUSE 12.2 has a base level of support. Is there any definitive
test that anyone can suggest?

Re: Supported host distro updates

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:10 AM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>             CentOS release 5.6 (Final) \n \
>             CentOS release 5.7 (Final) \n \

I do testing on

CentOS release 5.8 (Final)

and

Fedora release 13 (Goddard)

I'm even fixing issues with libx11 now on CentOS 5.x

-M

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday 24 September 2012 19:03:57 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> CentOS release 5.8 (Final)

OK, so do we keep 5.6 / 5.7 or remove them in favour of 5.8?

> Fedora release 13 (Goddard)

I think this is probably too old for us to be declaring support for, since it 
has been unsupported upstream for some time now.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Supported host distro updates

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Monday 24 September 2012 19:03:57 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
>> CentOS release 5.8 (Final)
>
> OK, so do we keep 5.6 / 5.7 or remove them in favour of 5.8?

I don't think you can... each of these present different issues I've
found and fixed along the way.

>> Fedora release 13 (Goddard)
>
> I think this is probably too old for us to be declaring support for, since it
> has been unsupported upstream for some time now.

This has been working for me for a while (with a lot fewer issues to
fix than CentOS 5.x) unless I'm missing something, I don't think it's
too old.

-M

Re: Supported host distro updates

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday 01 October 2012 14:21:47 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Eggleton
> 
> <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Monday 24 September 2012 19:03:57 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> >> CentOS release 5.8 (Final)
> > 
> > OK, so do we keep 5.6 / 5.7 or remove them in favour of 5.8?
> 
> I don't think you can... each of these present different issues I've
> found and fixed along the way.

OK, I'll leave them in for the moment.

> >> Fedora release 13 (Goddard)
> > 
> > I think this is probably too old for us to be declaring support for, since
> > it has been unsupported upstream for some time now.
> 
> This has been working for me for a while (with a lot fewer issues to
> fix than CentOS 5.x) unless I'm missing something, I don't think it's
> too old.

I consider it too old because of its upstream support status, but also because 
broadly we commit to supporting N and N-1 (and usually N+1) where N is the 
most recent release of the distribution. Fedora 13 would be N-4.

Not having Fedora 13 (or any other distro or distro version, for that matter) 
in this list does not mean that you can't continue to use it, nor does it 
necessarily mean that we won't take patches to fix support for it should it 
break.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Supported host distro updates

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Monday 01 October 2012 14:21:47 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Eggleton
>>
>> <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday 24 September 2012 19:03:57 McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
>> >> CentOS release 5.8 (Final)
>> >
>> > OK, so do we keep 5.6 / 5.7 or remove them in favour of 5.8?
>>
>> I don't think you can... each of these present different issues I've
>> found and fixed along the way.
>
> OK, I'll leave them in for the moment.
>
>> >> Fedora release 13 (Goddard)
>> >
>> > I think this is probably too old for us to be declaring support for, since
>> > it has been unsupported upstream for some time now.
>>
>> This has been working for me for a while (with a lot fewer issues to
>> fix than CentOS 5.x) unless I'm missing something, I don't think it's
>> too old.
>
> I consider it too old because of its upstream support status, but also because
> broadly we commit to supporting N and N-1 (and usually N+1) where N is the
> most recent release of the distribution. Fedora 13 would be N-4.
>
> Not having Fedora 13 (or any other distro or distro version, for that matter)
> in this list does not mean that you can't continue to use it, nor does it
> necessarily mean that we won't take patches to fix support for it should it
> break.

Perhaps a better solution here is to have two lists. An officially
tested and supported along with a known not to work list.

-M