Re: Call For Participation Debian Cloud Sprint
On 11/08/16 at 14:13 -0700, Zach Marano wrote: > We are organizing a Debian cloud sprint to focus on subjects like: > - What does it mean to run Debian in the cloud. > - Define the official Debian cloud image. > - In depth look at how Debian works on current cloud platforms (AWS, Azure, > GCE, etc). > ... etc (complete agenda TBD) > > Ideally, we solve all (or as many as possible) of the open questions which > were discussed at Debconf and on the debian-cloud list and come to > consensus on what an official Debian cloud image is, how it works in the > various cloud offerings, and have a realistic timeline to offer such an > image for the community at large. Bonus points if we actually have > something working. > > I am targeting November 2 - 4, 2016 in Seattle, WA (USA). > https://wiki.debian.org/Sprints/2016/DebianCloudNov2016 > > Please respond if you are interested in attending so we can find a suitable > space (or if you happen to have such a space). Thanks! Hi, I'm interested in participating. I would come from Nancy, France. I've done some work on AWS using Debian (archive rebuilds), and have looked into the content of the Debian AWS image. I've looked at image creation in another similar context, which could be useful (not really in terms of tools involved, but in terms of image content -- the context was a research testbed where having a clearly defined image content is particularly important, because of scientific experiments reproducibility issues). Lucas
Tentative summary of the AMD/ATI/NVidia issue (was: Finding a tentative bullseye release date)
On 24/04/21 at 09:25 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote: > Hi, > > Cyril Brulebois wrote (Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:13:15 +0200): > > D-I Bullseye RC 1 was published a few hours ago. And at the risk of > > sounding like a broken record: I have *absolutely no guarantee* to > > have a fix or workaround for the amdgpu issue in less than a month, > > that would be tested somewhat. > > > > Can we please *not* release with black screens for AMD users? > > Moreover, it's not just an AMD issue. > We got a confirmation just now on debian-boot, that also NVIDIA users can > get affected by this: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2021/04/msg00225.html > Some months ago, I have confirmed with that user, that missing firmware > is indeed the issue there! Hi, Disclaimer: I read the "[AMD/ATI graphics] Missing firmware not declared / kernel modules not included in initrd" thread. While my understanding of the issue is not complete, I'm trying to summarize what I undertood so far in the hope that others can jump in and fill in the blanks or correct me. There are graphic cards whose in-kernel drivers require non-free firmwares. Typically AMD/ATI cards that require firmware-amd-graphics[1] to work with the radeon, amdgpu and r128 drivers; or NVIDIA cards that require firmware-misc-nonfree to work with the nouveau driver. [1] https://packages.debian.org/unstable/firmware-amd-graphics With Debian 10, the behaviour was that the installation succeeded without installing firmware-* packages, and then, and the first boot, X would start in a "degraded" mode (using, for example, the vesa driver). The user would generally then install the firmware package (or, in the case of NVidia, switch to the proprietary drivers). With Debian 11, the installation also succeeds, but then at first boot, X fails to work correctly. What happens here is unclear: reports vary between "black screen" (but does the system works if the user switches to console mode?), "garbled screen", "system crash" (but maybe the user did not notice that the system works in console mode). It looks like the three open paths for resolution are: A) understand and restore the behaviour from Debian 10, that is, get X to work in a degraded mode after installation. How it worked with Debian 10 (and why it doesn't with Debian 11) is unknown. B) In the installer, detect that firmware-amd-graphics or firmware-misc-nonfree should be installed, and either install it (?), or redirect the user to the unofficial installer that includes them. C) Do nothing and document this in the release notes The main blocking factor for progress seems to be that not enough people have both hardware that is not supported (laptops/desktops with AMD or NVidia graphic cards), and the knowledge and time to investigate this. Lucas
Re: Tentative summary of the AMD/ATI/NVidia issue (was: Finding a tentative bullseye release date)
On 25/04/21 at 11:04 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > B) In the installer, detect that firmware-amd-graphics or > > firmware-misc-nonfree should be installed, and either install it (?), > > or redirect the user to the unofficial installer that includes them. > > That could be achieved for an installer that has non-free enabled, > provided the proposal by Ben gets implemented, then consumed on the d-i > side. For reference, I think Ben's proposal is: https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2021/03/msg00088.html Lucas
Bug#1042037: syslinux: FTBFS: main.c:33:8: error: unknown type name ‘jmp_buf’
Source: syslinux Version: 3:6.04~git20190206.bf6db5b4+dfsg1-3 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: trixie sid ftbfs Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part (hopefully): > gcc -I/usr/include/efi -I/usr/include/efi/ia32 -DEFI_FUNCTION_WRAPPER -fPIC > -fshort-wchar -ffreestanding -fcommon -Wall -I/<>/com32/include > -I/<>/com32/include/sys -I/<>/core/include > -I/<>/core/ -m32 -march=i386 -I/<>/com32/lib/ > -I/<>/com32/libutil/include -std=gnu99 -DELF_DEBUG > -DSYSLINUX_EFI -I/<>/efi32 -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes > -D__COM32__ -D__FIRMWARE_EFI32__ -mno-red-zone -DLDLINUX=\"ldlinux.e32\" > -fvisibility=hidden -Wno-unused-parameter -fno-stack-protector > -Wno-strict-prototypes -DDATE_STR='"20200816"' -c -o main.o > /<>/efi/main.c > /<>/efi/main.c:33:8: error: unknown type name ‘jmp_buf’ >33 | static jmp_buf load_error_buf; > |^~~ > /<>/efi/main.c: In function ‘local_boot’: > /<>/efi/main.c:187:5: warning: implicit declaration of function > ‘longjmp’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > 187 | longjmp(&load_error_buf, 1); > | ^~~ > /<>/efi/main.c: In function ‘build_gdt’: > /<>/efi/main.c:905:82: warning: taking address of packed member > of ‘struct dt_desc’ may result in an unaligned pointer value > [-Waddress-of-packed-member] > 905 | status = emalloc(gdt.limit, __SIZEOF_POINTER__ , > (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS *)&gdt.base); > | >^ > /<>/efi/main.c: In function ‘efi_main’: > /<>/efi/main.c:1385:14: warning: implicit declaration of > function ‘setjmp’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > 1385 | if (!setjmp(&load_error_buf)) > | ^~ > make[5]: *** [/<>/mk/efi.mk:71: main.o] Error 1 The full build log is available from: http://qa-logs.debian.net/2023/07/24/syslinux_6.04~git20190206.bf6db5b4+dfsg1-3_unstable.log A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute! If you reassign this bug to another package, please mark it as 'affects'-ing this package. See https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control#affects If you fail to reproduce this, please provide a build log and diff it with mine so that we can identify if something relevant changed in the meantime.
Bug#1091027: syslinux: FTBFS: debug.c:91:5: error: implicit declaration of function ‘printf’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
Source: syslinux
Version: 3:6.04~git20190206.bf6db5b4+dfsg1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: trixie sid ftbfs
User: lu...@debian.org
Usertags: ftbfs-20241222 ftbfs-trixie
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> gcc -MT syslinux/debug.o -MD -MF syslinux/.debug.o.d -Os -march=i386
> -falign-functions=0 -falign-jumps=0 -falign-labels=0 -ffast-math
> -fomit-frame-pointer -std=gnu99 -m32 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
> -fno-stack-protector -fwrapv -freg-struct-return -fPIC -fno-exceptions
> -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-strict-aliasing -falign-functions=0
> -falign-jumps=0 -falign-labels=0 -falign-loops=0 -g -D__COM32__
> -D__FIRMWARE_BIOS__ -nostdinc -iwithprefix include -I.
> -I/<>/com32/lib/sys -I/<>/com32/lib/../include
> -I/<>/com32/include/sys -I/<>/core/include
> -I/<>/com32/lib/ -I/<>/com32/lib/sys/module
> -I/<>/bios/com32/lib//../.. -fcommon -W -Wall
> -Wstrict-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Winline -DDYNAMIC_CRC_TABLE -mregparm=3 -DREGPARM=3 -c -o syslinux/debug.o
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c: In function ‘syslinux_debug’:
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c:91:5: error: implicit declaration
> of function ‘printf’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
>91 | printf("Dynamic debug unavailable\n");
> | ^~
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c:4:1: note: include ‘’ or
> provide a declaration of ‘printf’
> 3 | #include
> +++ |+#include
> 4 |
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c:91:5: warning: incompatible
> implicit declaration of built-in function ‘printf’
> [-Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch]
>91 | printf("Dynamic debug unavailable\n");
> | ^~
> /<>/com32/lib/syslinux/debug.c:91:5: note: include ‘’
> or provide a declaration of ‘printf’
> make[6]: *** [/<>/mk/lib.mk:215: syslinux/debug.o] Error 1
The full build log is available from:
http://qa-logs.debian.net/2024/12/22/syslinux_6.04~git20190206.bf6db5b4+dfsg1-3_unstable.log
All bugs filed during this archive rebuild are listed at:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-20241222;users=lu...@debian.org
or:
https://udd.debian.org/bugs/?release=na&merged=ign&fnewerval=7&flastmodval=7&fusertag=only&fusertagtag=ftbfs-20241222&fusertaguser=lu...@debian.org&allbugs=1&cseverity=1&ctags=1&caffected=1#results
A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at
http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute!
If you reassign this bug to another package, please mark it as 'affects'-ing
this package. See https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control#affects
If you fail to reproduce this, please provide a build log and diff it with mine
so that we can identify if something relevant changed in the meantime.
