We'll be looking into this soon. I'll need plugwash's help as he's much more familiar with the ins & outs of the Debian repository and the configuration changes on our side to accommodate multiple repositories in our infrastructure. At a minimum, we'll get the 'all' architecture packages which include a lot of USB device firmware which will make many USB devices usable under Raspbian (ie. USB wifi dongles and such). How soon we'll be able to devote the build systems to the actual architecture dependent packages is more of an open question. I do have additional hardware on order, but it won't get here until the last week of June at the earliest.john.mills wrote:Now that Debian main is almost completed porting across will you be turning your attention to porting the Debian non-free repositories? If some of the build machines are available then this would be a very good idea. There are a lot of packages that would be really useful to have available on the Pi and provide a much better user experience going forward.
So, "additional hardware" - a Beowulf cluster built out of hundreds of little R-Pi's...!?mpthompson wrote: I do have additional hardware on order, but it won't get here until the last week of June at the earliest.
CPU wise and price wise they are comparable to the beagleXM but unlike the beagleXM they have 1GB of ram, SATA and native ethernet (the ethernet on the beagleXM is USB based).ian.macarthur123 wrote:OK - those look quite neat, actually... Reminds me of my old beagle, only, newer...
They are native builds. Everything inside the build chroot on the autobuilers is from raspbian.which are almost-but-not-quite native builds, I guess.
It's not generally a huge issue. Occasionally a package makes inappropriate assumptions but that can happen on any architecture. Having a build machines support more features than the port requires is not exactly unusual.I imagine that makes a lot of things easier for configure, though must leave you with occasional really subtle host/target differences to resolve.
There are obviously capital costs in building and expanding the farm but on an ongoing basis it doesn't need much, just a bit of power (indeed I bet that the repo host probablly draws more than all the autobuilders put together :/)Must be some costs associated with maintaining the build-farm though -
We do plan to set up a donations page soon.you ok for funding on this?
Please do... I am sure that there are many members on here (including myself) who would be more than willing to make a donation to this project... especially if it would help to move things along at all!plugwash wrote: We do plan to set up a donations page soon.
Terrific. I added you as an editor on Wiki. Document away...Baranyk wrote:Registered on the Wiki as DanielFenton. If you're okay with my help, I'm ready to help document.
Replacing gcc with a linaro version would be a risky move and not one I plan to make. Hopefully in time improvements from gcc will filter up to upstream gcc and then down to the debian gcc packages. Anything recent will probablly have to wait for wheezy+1 though.mfc_alpha wrote: First, Linaro get some performance improvement using last gcc version (http://www.cnx-software.com/2012/06/03/ ... -omap4430/) .
Could we benefit from this ?
I set up a vm with qemu-user chroots and tried building apt in it, the result was that the build took slightly longer than it did on an IMX board (admittedly the host was only a pentium G).The Second one is about the build system. Is it possible to benefit from emulation on x86 ?
I was used to build arm binaries using scratchbox and I just find this (http://www.stgraber.org/2012/02/03/ever ... u-precise/). This was just for simple binaries not the whole system.
Note that due to the way debian testing works it is likely that we have some stuff that debian wheezy armhf does not. In particular I beleive this applies to haskell packages since there has been a haskell transition going on for a LONG time.mpthompson wrote: As of June 11th, Raspbian is hovering at just under 80 binary packages under Debian Wheezy. Out of 34,816 packages, a gap of 80 packages is not bad at all. Quite frankly, I'm surprised we have been able to get this close. I'll have to check to make sure there are not orphaned binary package in the Raspbian repository that may be artificially increasing the Raspbian package count.
Thank you very much for the donation. We'll do our best to keep things moving forward.Zinahe wrote:Damn ! It's 1:08 AM in the morning and it took me more than 2 and half hours to read through all the 23 pages of this post. Big ups to plugwash and mpthompson for such an amazing contribution to the RPi community. I've sent $25 your way as a small token of my gratitude.
Keep up the good work.
There will be. I just haven't got around to setting it up just yet. This will be a reminder for me to take care of it.MisterAlex wrote:Is there a Twitter feed I could follow to keep abreast of Raspbian progress?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests