Re: hppa release status

[Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>]

CC'ed: parisc-linux kernel development list

Andreas Barth wrote:
> during the upload of python2.5, the build failed on hppa due to stalls
> in the test suite, see http://bugs.debian.org/483042 and
> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?&pkg=python2.5&ver=2.5.2-5&arch=hppa&stamp=1211583145&file=log
> (Matthias "fixed" that bug by disabling the testsuite, not something that makes
> us happy.)
> 
> After that happened, we asked on #parisc if someone could take a look,
> and we were told that linuxthreads is currently unmaintained for hppa,
> and the issue could only be fixed by moving to nptl and we need to do an
> (incompatible) abi change in glibc. Such a change would be really
> unfortunate, and we hope that every other roads have been evaluated
> first (like trying to understand why python on linuxthreads fails on
> hppa but not on e.g. kfreebsd). We also would like to be sure that ntpl
> is really better than linuxthreads for python2.5 before a transition.

My personal feeling is, that a switch to NPTL is probably the best 
solution. Even if this involves a abi change.
Maybe experts on NPTL could comment here?

> In addition to the python2.5 issue, there are two other issues that are
> quite concerning:
>   * a problem with ruby1.9 which likely is kernel related #478717.

Hmm..

>   * dirmngr that segfaults, likely because of some signalstack issues
>     #459567.

Yes, we need to implement makecontext()/getcontext() in glibc.

> We've seen no porter activity on those bugs yet.

I'd volunteer to try on thedirmngr/makecontext() issue. (At least as far 
as my time permits).

> On further discussing that within the release team, we noticed that the
> Qualification page on http://wiki.debian.org/hppaLennyReleaseRecertification
> is not really complete, e.g. it says:
> | The installer is being maintained by ... and it's currently working
> | effectively. Successful installation reports are available at: ...
> 
> It would really be great (read: it is necessary) that the Qualification
> Page is filled with the missing information, and that we actually have
> enough porters for hppa.

I've added myself there in a few items.
I'd be willing to look into issues with the installer, but not being a 
active debian developer I'd need help from a debian guy if necessary.

> So, with respect to the python2.5 issue, what now?
> 
> 
> At the technical side, best of course would be if linuxthreads would
> continue to work at least enough for lenny, this was the case for a few
> years already, it should be able to survive a few months more, and
> python2.5 can build with the test-suite on hppa.  Of course not breaking
> the API during a linuxthreads -> NPTL switch would be even better.

I can't comment on that.

> If really you see no other option than switching to NPTL, even at the
> current unfortunate moment, the only way how this could be done in a
> timely fashion would be to exempt hppa from the list of architectures
> our testing migration scripts look at for updateness and non-breakness.
> Then upload glibc ASAP, and schedule an archive-wide binNMU campaign.
> 
> Of course, this demands enough buildd power, and wanna-build access by
> (some of) the porters (or whatever else you consider appropriate).
> Moreover it needs quite a lot of time to track that closely, which the
> Release Team probably won't have on its own, so we will need hppa
> buildd-admin and hppa porters time, a lot.
> 
> After the transition is done (and we can only hope it is in time for
> lenny), hppa could be added back to the normal architectures. Downside
> of this is of course that in case hppa is slower than lenny, lenny would
> be released without hppa.

which would be sad...


> Of course, we also need plans for the ruby and dirmngr issues.

Yes.

> So, after that long mail, what's your take on this? How do we continue?

Any other comments?

Helge