<davidlt>
The only difference today would be that ACPI might be working now (would need to check).
amusil has quit [Quit: Client closed]
amusil has joined #fedora-riscv
<davidlt>
I don't recall if changes to edk2 landed in upstream Fedora, or stayed in virt-preview COPR
<amusil>
However this command just leads to black screen, not sure if the image is really booting and the console is just wrong or it's not doing anything at all
<davidlt>
The EFI kernels depend on UEFI firmware. It's using EFI ZBOOT to uncompress itself (riscv and arm kernels dont have uncompressor available in the kernel itself)
<davidlt>
EFI ZBOOT stuff was added recently, and it's generic (used by arm64 and riscv64) to uncompress itself
<amusil>
And I need to find a way to convince virt-install to set it up
<davidlt>
I do want to ship EDKII by default in Fedora 40 for riscv64, but some bits depend on RH folks working on bootloader bits
<davidlt>
I most likely will nuke GRUB2 and go for systemd-boot, but that required rebasing gnu-efi, which is "stuck" too. Yet it's way smaller compared to GRUB2 stuff.
<amusil>
But thank you very much for the pointer, at least I know where to continue
<amusil>
How close is proper official build for riscv?
<davidlt>
So Pungi uses libvirt to run all of this. Thus it works.
<davidlt>
Depends on what you call official, we have been building Fedora since 2016 :)
<amusil>
Well the same images as for arm64
<amusil>
Just grab and go :)
<davidlt>
So we had that for years, but in recent years it's hard to find time to cook them (requires testing).
<davidlt>
It's basically lack of hands and time in a day to finish anything. That's why we images happen so rarely.
<davidlt>
I need to work on a new kernel too, but I still doing Rust, Python, Perl rebuilds
<davidlt>
amusil, if you are a package maintainer you can also post here dist-git URLs for testing, and in some cases we also create accounts
<amusil>
I'm not currently
hursand has joined #fedora-riscv
davidlt has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<hursand>
rwmjones_ Hello and I got a problem. We've tested before that the the tests for ghc related packages(ghc-*) haven't explicitly supported riscv64 arch. So I plan to submit a pull request to disable the entire tests for ghc-* packages on riscv64 arch, and I want to know if that's acceptable?
JasenChao has joined #fedora-riscv
davidlt has joined #fedora-riscv
<rwmjones_>
davidlt: ^^
<rwmjones_>
hursand said:
<rwmjones_>
│07:27:01 hursand | rwmjones_ Hello and I got a problem. We've tested before that the the tests for ghc related │ kito-cheng
<rwmjones_>
│ | packages(ghc-*) haven't explicitly supported riscv64 arch. So I plan to submit a pull request to │ leah2
<rwmjones_>
│ | disable the entire tests for ghc-* packages on riscv64 arch, and I want to know if that's acceptable? │ moto-timo
<davidlt>
hursand, don't we run tests for GHC packages?
<rwmjones_>
hursand: are there particular packages that fail?
<rwmjones_>
what is the failure?
<davidlt>
IIRC the tests are running (otherwise packages wouldn't build)
<hursand>
davidlt Yes we do run tests for GHC packages, and there're some specific packages that failed to pass the tests
<rwmjones_>
I think david has rebuilt all or almost all ghc packages unmodified
<davidlt>
hursand, could you give us a list of packages
<davidlt>
?
<rwmjones_>
I'd like to see an example of a failure
<davidlt>
I haven't rebuild the whole GHC package land, but majority right now.
<davidlt>
and I don't recall any particular troubling things in the past (C or LLVM backends).
<davidlt>
Thus I wouldn't want a global disable, and instead we should investigate whatever is failing for now.
<hursand>
The previous compilation is on fc39 branch and I'm rebuilding these packages on rawhide, I'll be back with detailed info if the error persists
<davidlt>
hursand, could you give example now?
<davidlt>
Note in Fedora/RISCV we don't really have F39, we skipped it to chase F40 (CentOS Stream 10).
<hursand>
davidlt I've checked all the failed packages and found the most errors are like ```Couldn't find a target code interpreter. Try with -fexternal-interpreter```, and these packages can be successfully built on rawhide branch now, so I think all ghc packages should be ok now. Sorry for bothering :)
<davidlt>
That's fixed, take a new GHC from fedora.riscv.rocks
<hursand>
Got it
<davidlt>
We fixed that 1-2 weeks ago.
<rwmjones_>
hursand: yeah we fixed that one, fix is in Rawhide
<davidlt>
rwmjones_, it would be great if you could prep the same changes to ghc9.6, and ghc9.8
<davidlt>
rwmjones_, especially 9.6 as that's what Fedora 40 will ship as default