FreeBSD 10.0-RC3 Now Available

[Glen Barber]

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 01:24:17PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> On Dec 26, 2013, at 1:23 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 08:20:16PM +0000, Andrew Turner wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:55:12 -0500
> >> Glen Barber <gjb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:48:30PM +0000, Andrew Turner wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 10:25:09 -0800
> >>>> Tim Kientzle <kientzle at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On Dec 26, 2013, at 8:25 AM, Glen Barber <gjb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> The third RC build of the 10.0-RELEASE release cycle is now
> >>>>>> available on the FTP servers for the amd64, i386, ia64, powerpc,
> >>>>>> powerpc64 and sparc64 architectures.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> What do we need to include some ARM images?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> At a minimum, I would love to get an official RC3 build for RPi.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I would suggest we could build a tarball of armv6 userland and an
> >>>> RPi image to dd to an SD card.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Building the former should be straight forward.
> >>>> 
> >>>> For the latter, assuming the release target is unable to build the
> >>>> required U-Boot binary, we could use crochet. I'm not sure if we can
> >>>> use a tarball as the input for this to guarantee both are the same.
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> The problem with using crochet is that it requires git on the build
> >>> machine, which just adds to the minimum dependencies needed, both for
> >>> crochet itself, and (last I was aware) an external uboot tree.
> >> 
> >> Github allows you to use svn to checkout a git repo with svn. There is
> >> an option under the clone url to set it to subversion.
> >> 
> >> U-Boot should just be a tarball, if it is a git repo we would need to
> >> make it a tarball for the release to supply the source as it is GPL.
> >> 
> >>> Maybe it is just more sensible to take what crochet is doing, and make
> >>> that into a release target.
> >> 
> >> Yes, but I assume this is not feasible for 10.0.
> >> 
> > 
> > It depends on how the test builds go, which I am working on right now.
> > They may not be considered "official", since we're at the end of the
> > release cycle.  But if I can get something working, I'll be happy to
> > hand-roll -RELEASE builds.
> 
> I'm cool with that, especially if it enables official 10.1R releases this summerish...
> 

It would at least give me an idea of what is needed, and then I can
easily start building regular snapshots, which would give us 10.0-STABLE
builds, if we can't get something working by 10.0-RELEASE.

Glen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/attachments/20131226/60858541/attachment.sig>