Mailing List Archive

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, 15:23 Emilio Fernandes <emilio.fernandes70@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello Varnish team,
>
> I'd like to ask whether AARCH64 architecture is officially supported one.
> I wasn't able to find anything on the website but I've found that there is
> a CI [1] and some tickets [2].
> Few comments in this ticket [3] say that ARM64 is known to work fine on
> FreeBSD and Linux (Ubuntu & Fedora).
> Finally I see only x86_64 and amd64 packages at [4]
>
> My request is: Would it be possible to add aarch64 package(s) to
> PackageCloud too ?
>

+1 for ARM64 packages!

Martin

OSes update the packages with a delay. At the moment the only option to
> update after a security
> release fix is to build from source. It is OK but it would be nicer if
> "apt update && apt upgrade"
> does it for me as soon as there is something new in PackageCloud.
>
> And maybe mention somewhere on the website which are the supported
> architectures.
>
> Thank you for Varnish Cache!
>
> Gracias!
> Emilio
>
> 1.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/b365be2d281944d5c79be92ff73b3dc02c5db6be/.travis.yml#L35-L43
> 2.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues?q=is%3Aissue+aarch64+
> & https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues?q=is%3Aissue+arm64
> 3.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues/3227#issuecomment-590334301
> 4. https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache/varnish63?page=1
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-dev mailing list
> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, 15:23 Emilio Fernandes <emilio.fernandes70@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello Varnish team,
>
> I'd like to ask whether AARCH64 architecture is officially supported one.
> I wasn't able to find anything on the website but I've found that there is
> a CI [1] and some tickets [2].
> Few comments in this ticket [3] say that ARM64 is known to work fine on
> FreeBSD and Linux (Ubuntu & Fedora).
> Finally I see only x86_64 and amd64 packages at [4]
>
> My request is: Would it be possible to add aarch64 package(s) to
> PackageCloud too ?
>

+1 for ARM64 packages!

Martin

OSes update the packages with a delay. At the moment the only option to
> update after a security
> release fix is to build from source. It is OK but it would be nicer if
> "apt update && apt upgrade"
> does it for me as soon as there is something new in PackageCloud.
>
> And maybe mention somewhere on the website which are the supported
> architectures.
>
> Thank you for Varnish Cache!
>
> Gracias!
> Emilio
>
> 1.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/b365be2d281944d5c79be92ff73b3dc02c5db6be/.travis.yml#L35-L43
> 2.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues?q=is%3Aissue+aarch64+
> & https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues?q=is%3Aissue+arm64
> 3.
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/issues/3227#issuecomment-590334301
> 4. https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache/varnish63?page=1
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-dev mailing list
> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>

--------
In message <CADRXdtP_CoMObMqw3PJ0bS7kUkbtSTguwcaaNiPzZRyg82AQLw@mail.gmail.com>
, Emilio Fernandes writes:

>I'd like to ask whether AARCH64 architecture is officially supported one.

Hi Emilio,

In the sense that we meticulously makes sure that Varnish works on
all archtectures we can lay our hands on, including arm64: Yes it
is supported.

You can see here which arch/os/compiler combos our daily testing
involves:

http://varnish-cache.org/vtest/

I'm pretty sure FreeBSD has arm64 varnish packages, but I'll let
our package-meisters answer with respect to package building on
Linux.

>Thank you for Varnish Cache!

You're welcome!


--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev

Hi Poul-Henning,

El mié., 11 mar. 2020 a las 9:15, Poul-Henning Kamp (<phk@phk.freebsd.dk>)
escribió:

> --------
> In message <
> CADRXdtP_CoMObMqw3PJ0bS7kUkbtSTguwcaaNiPzZRyg82AQLw@mail.gmail.com>
> , Emilio Fernandes writes:
>
> >I'd like to ask whether AARCH64 architecture is officially supported one.
>
> Hi Emilio,
>
> In the sense that we meticulously makes sure that Varnish works on
> all archtectures we can lay our hands on, including arm64: Yes it
> is supported.
>

Thank you for confirming!


>
> You can see here which arch/os/compiler combos our daily testing
> involves:
>
> http://varnish-cache.org/vtest/


>
> I'm pretty sure FreeBSD has arm64 varnish packages, but I'll let
> our package-meisters answer with respect to package building on
> Linux.
>

I hope the person(s) who manage(s) the Varnish packages at PackageCloud
will notice this message! :-)

Gracias!
Emilio


>
> >Thank you for Varnish Cache!
>
> You're welcome!
>
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>

Hi,

Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
- arm64-compatible code (all good in
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
- arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
- infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
- infrastructure to store and deliver (https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)

So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
there are two concurrent CI implementations:
- travis:
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
- circleci:
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml
the
new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
the packaged platforms

The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for now?), so
we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's not a big
problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.

However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take that
up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle everything and
we can retire the circleci experiment

--
Guillaume Quintard

Hi Guillaume,

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>
> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
> there are two concurrent CI implementations:
> - travis:
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>

Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.


> - circleci:
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
> the packaged platforms
>
> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for now?),
> so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's not a
> big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>
> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take that
> up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle everything and
> we can retire the circleci experiment
>

I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!

Regards,
Martin


>
> --
> Guillaume Quintard
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-dev mailing list
> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>

--------
In message <CAJ6ZYQyw+LUdtHyOND1ifiRdn9-E0B_XdJhprJNmHKBA0zxL4w@mail.gmail.com>
, Guillaume Quintard writes:

>Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:

Don't we have packages for a bunch of non-x86 architectures on Redhat ?

I seem to recall Ingvar popping up with issues on s390 and other archs
every so often ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 08:46 Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

> --------
> In message <
> CAJ6ZYQyw+LUdtHyOND1ifiRdn9-E0B_XdJhprJNmHKBA0zxL4w@mail.gmail.com>
> , Guillaume Quintard writes:
>
> >Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>
> Don't we have packages for a bunch of non-x86 architectures on Redhat ?
>

We do, in the sense that distributions do the work, but I believe the
question was about the packagecloud repos.

Fedora is possibly a good student he, providing timely packages (Dridi
appears in 3..2..1..) but we definitely cannot expect the same thing from
the debians.

>

> We do, in the sense that distributions do the work, but I believe the question was about the packagecloud repos.
>
> Fedora is possibly a good student he, providing timely packages (Dridi appears in 3..2..1..) but we definitely cannot expect the same thing from the debians.

*appears*

Fedora builds packages for a bunch of architectures, and builds
packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and derivatives via its EPEL
project. So Fedora has "official" Varnish packages outside the x86_64
realm (power pc, system/390 mainframes, arm boards) but we don't.

*disappears*
_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Guillaume,
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>
>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
>> there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>> - travis:
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>
>
> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>
>
>> - circleci:
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>> the packaged platforms
>>
>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for now?),
>> so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's not a
>> big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>
>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take that
>> up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle everything and
>> we can retire the circleci experiment
>>
>
> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>

I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
problems and possible solutions:

1) Circle CI
1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so there
is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
1.2) possible solutions
1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds and
runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build steps
It will look something like
https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38
but
instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
images

From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to do
1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.

2) Travis CI
2.1) problems
2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than the
current 'Docker' executor!
2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.

3) GitHub Actions
GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64 runners
3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
runner only for commits against
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache

Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
Do you have preferences which way to go ?

Regards,
Martin


>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume Quintard
>> _______________________________________________
>> varnish-dev mailing list
>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>
>

Hi,


On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guillaume,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>
>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
>>> there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>> - travis:
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>
>>
>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>
>>
>>> - circleci:
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>> the packaged platforms
>>>
>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for now?),
>>> so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's not a
>>> big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>
>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take
>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>
>>
>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>
>
> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
> problems and possible solutions:
>
> 1) Circle CI
> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
> 1.2) possible solutions
> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds and
> runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build steps
> It will look something like
> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
> images
>
> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to do
> 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>

I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with QEMU.

The changed config.yml could be seen at
https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci
and
the build at
https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!) ~40mins
For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
TODOs:
- migrate Alpine
- store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
- anything else that is still missing

Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile with
a base image from the respective type.

Martin


> 2) Travis CI
> 2.1) problems
> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than the
> current 'Docker' executor!
> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>
> 3) GitHub Actions
> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64 runners
> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
> runner only for commits against
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>
> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>
>>

Hi Martin,

Thank you for that.
A few remarks and questions:
- how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly speed
things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to change
very often.
- any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was to
have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and reproducibility,
which we lose here.
- do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
consistency?

--
Guillaume Quintard


On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>
>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
>>>> there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>> - travis:
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>
>>>
>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>
>>>
>>>> - circleci:
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>
>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>
>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take
>>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>
>>>
>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>
>>
>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>> problems and possible solutions:
>>
>> 1) Circle CI
>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>> 1.2) possible solutions
>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds and
>> runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build steps
>> It will look something like
>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>> images
>>
>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to do
>> 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>
>
> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with QEMU.
>
> The changed config.yml could be seen at
> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
> the build at
> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!) ~40mins
> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
> TODOs:
> - migrate Alpine
> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
> - anything else that is still missing
>
> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile with
> a base image from the respective type.
>
> Martin
>
>
>> 2) Travis CI
>> 2.1) problems
>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than
>> the current 'Docker' executor!
>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>
>> 3) GitHub Actions
>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>> runners
>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
>> runner only for commits against
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>
>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>
>>>

Hi Guillaume,

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> Thank you for that.
> A few remarks and questions:
> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly speed
> things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to change
> very often.
>

Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and then
builds all the Docker layers again and again.
Here are the timings:
1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
2) prepare env variables - 0secs
3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
4) activate QEMU - 2secs
5) build packages
5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins


> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was to
> have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and reproducibility,
> which we lose here.
>

I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first
CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!


> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
> consistency?
>

So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
Docker images.
For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).

Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request for
more comments!

Martin


>
> --
> Guillaume Quintard
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>
>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the moment,
>>>>> there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>> - travis:
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>
>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take
>>>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>>> problems and possible solutions:
>>>
>>> 1) Circle CI
>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
>>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds
>>> and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build
>>> steps
>>> It will look something like
>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>> images
>>>
>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to do
>>> 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>>
>>
>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with QEMU.
>>
>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>> the build at
>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!) ~40mins
>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>> TODOs:
>> - migrate Alpine
>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>> - anything else that is still missing
>>
>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile
>> with a base image from the respective type.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>> 2) Travis CI
>>> 2.1) problems
>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than
>>> the current 'Docker' executor!
>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>
>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>> runners
>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
>>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
>>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
>>> runner only for commits against
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>
>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>
>>>>

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Guillaume,
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Thank you for that.
>> A few remarks and questions:
>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly speed
>> things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to change
>> very often.
>>
>
> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and then
> builds all the Docker layers again and again.
> Here are the timings:
> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
> 5) build packages
> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>
>
>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was to
>> have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and reproducibility,
>> which we lose here.
>>
>
> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first
> CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>
>
>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
>> consistency?
>>
>
> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
> Docker images.
> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>
> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request for
> more comments!
>
> Martin
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume Quintard
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take
>>>>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>>>> problems and possible solutions:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
>>>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds
>>>> and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build
>>>> steps
>>>> It will look something like
>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>> images
>>>>
>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to do
>>>> 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with QEMU.
>>>
>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>> the build at
>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>> ~40mins
>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
>>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>> TODOs:
>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>
>>
Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
...
automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they will
automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
subdirectory
automake: of the corresponding sources.
automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
+ autoconf
+ CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
+ export CONFIG_SHELL
+ ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
--enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
--enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
--with-persistent-storage --quiet
configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are out of
date.
configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support

Does anyone know a workaround ?
I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image

Martin



> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>
>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile
>>> with a base image from the respective type.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than
>>>> the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>
>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>>> runners
>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
>>>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
>>>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
>>>> runner only for commits against
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>
>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>

Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the apkbuild
file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc, etc.) That
need to be set

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guillaume,
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> Thank you for that.
>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>> change very often.
>>>
>>
>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and then
>> builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>> Here are the timings:
>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>> 5) build packages
>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>
>>
>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was
>>> to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>
>>
>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first
>> CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>
>>
>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
>>> consistency?
>>>
>>
>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
>> Docker images.
>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
>> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>
>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request for
>> more comments!
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to take
>>>>>>> that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>>>>> problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
>>>>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds
>>>>> and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build
>>>>> steps
>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>> images
>>>>>
>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to
>>>>> do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with
>>>> QEMU.
>>>>
>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>> the build at
>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>> ~40mins
>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
>>>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>> TODOs:
>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>
>>>
> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
> ...
> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they will
> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
> subdirectory
> automake: of the corresponding sources.
> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
> + autoconf
> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
> + export CONFIG_SHELL
> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are out
> of date.
> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>
> Does anyone know a workaround ?
> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>
>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile
>>>> with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower than
>>>>> the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>>>> runners
>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
>>>>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
>>>>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
>>>>> runner only for commits against
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:

> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the apkbuild
> file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc, etc.) That
> need to be set
>

The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
It is called at:
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
In my branch at:
https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26

It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine is
fine.
AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.

Martin


> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>>> change very often.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and
>>> then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>> Here are the timings:
>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>> 5) build packages
>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>
>>>
>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was
>>>> to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first
>>> CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>
>>>
>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
>>>> consistency?
>>>>
>>>
>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
>>> Docker images.
>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
>>> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>
>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request for
>>> more comments!
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to
>>>>>>>> take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>>>>>> problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64, so
>>>>>> there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then builds
>>>>>> and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the build
>>>>>> steps
>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>> images
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to
>>>>>> do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with
>>>>> QEMU.
>>>>>
>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>> the build at
>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>>> ~40mins
>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
>>>>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>
>>>>
>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>> ...
>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they
>> will
>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
>> subdirectory
>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>> + autoconf
>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are out
>> of date.
>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>
>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>
>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile
>>>>> with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower
>>>>>> than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>>>>> runners
>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted runner
>>>>>> really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in the fork
>>>>>> will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve the
>>>>>> runner only for commits against
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

Hi,

So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide us
with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
everyone, just for that specific platform.

On the other hand,
https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168
is
closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
--
Guillaume Quintard


On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>
>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the apkbuild
>> file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc, etc.) That
>> need to be set
>>
>
> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
> It is called at:
>
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
> In my branch at:
>
> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>
> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine is
> fine.
> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>
> Martin
>
>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>>>> change very often.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and
>>>> then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>> 5) build packages
>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea was
>>>>> to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my first
>>>> CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
>>>>> consistency?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
>>>> Docker images.
>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
>>>> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>
>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request
>>>> for more comments!
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to
>>>>>>>>> take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found as
>>>>>>> problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64,
>>>>>>> so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how to
>>>>>>> do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd prefer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with
>>>>>> QEMU.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>>>> ~40mins
>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7 and
>>>>>> Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>> ...
>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they
>>> will
>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
>>> subdirectory
>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>> + autoconf
>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are out
>>> of date.
>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>
>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new Dockerfile
>>>>>> with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower
>>>>>>> than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>>>>>> runners
>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>

Hi,

I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools' and
the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual packing
jobs.
Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:

abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
]0; DEBUG: 4
]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using abuild
3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>>> varnish: Checking sanity of /package/APKBUILD...
>>> WARNING: varnish: No maintainer
>>> varnish: Analyzing dependencies...
0% %
build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
Waiting for repository lock
ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>> ERROR: varnish: builddeps failed
]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
Waiting for repository lock
ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor

Google suggested to do this:
rm -rf /var/cache/apk
mkdir /var/cache/apk

It fails at 'abuild -r' -
https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61

Any hints ?

Martin

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide us
> with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>
> On the other hand,
> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
> --
> Guillaume Quintard
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>
>>
>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>> It is called at:
>>
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>> In my branch at:
>>
>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>
>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine is
>> fine.
>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>>>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>>>>> change very often.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and
>>>>> then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea
>>>>>> was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake of
>>>>>> consistency?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
>>>>> Docker images.
>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
>>>>> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>
>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request
>>>>> for more comments!
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers (for
>>>>>>>>>> now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis. It's
>>>>>>>>>> not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to
>>>>>>>>>> take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found
>>>>>>>> as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64,
>>>>>>>> so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>>>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how
>>>>>>>> to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with
>>>>>>> QEMU.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>>>>> ~40mins
>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7
>>>>>>> and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>> ...
>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they
>>>> will
>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
>>>> subdirectory
>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>> + autoconf
>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are
>>>> out of date.
>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower
>>>>>>>> than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted ARM64
>>>>>>>> runners
>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>

is that script running as root?

--
Guillaume Quintard


On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools' and
> the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual packing
> jobs.
> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>
> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
> ]0; DEBUG: 4
> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using abuild
> 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
> 0% %
> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
> Waiting for repository lock
> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
> Waiting for repository lock
> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>
> Google suggested to do this:
> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>
> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>
> Any hints ?
>
> Martin
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide us
>> with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
>> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>
>> On the other hand,
>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>> --
>> Guillaume Quintard
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>
>>>
>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>> It is called at:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>> In my branch at:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>
>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine
>>> is fine.
>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>>>>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>>>>>> change very often.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and
>>>>>> then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea
>>>>>>> was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake
>>>>>>> of consistency?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the base
>>>>>> Docker images.
>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and aarch64
>>>>>> builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request
>>>>>> for more comments!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers
>>>>>>>>>>> (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis.
>>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to
>>>>>>>>>>> take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found
>>>>>>>>> as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on x86_64,
>>>>>>>>> so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will be
>>>>>>>>> extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how
>>>>>>>>> to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor with
>>>>>>>> QEMU.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>>>>>> ~40mins
>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7
>>>>>>>> and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions: they
>>>>> will
>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
>>>>> subdirectory
>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are
>>>>> out of date.
>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower
>>>>>>>>> than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 20:15 Guillaume Quintard <
guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:

> is that script running as root?
>

Yes.
I also added 'USER root' to its Dockerfile and '-u 0' to 'docker run'
arguments but it still doesn't work.
The x86 build is OK.
It must be something in the base docker image.
I've disabled the Alpine aarch64 job for now.
I'll send a PR tomorrow!

Regards,
Martin


> --
> Guillaume Quintard
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools' and
>> the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual packing
>> jobs.
>> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>>
>> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
>> ]0; DEBUG: 4
>> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using abuild
>> 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>> 0% %
>> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
>> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
>> Waiting for repository lock
>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
>> Waiting for repository lock
>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>
>> Google suggested to do this:
>> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
>> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>>
>> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>>
>> Any hints ?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide us
>>> with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
>>> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>>
>>> On the other hand,
>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>>> --
>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>>> It is called at:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>>> In my branch at:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>>
>>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine
>>>> is fine.
>>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can possibly
>>>>>>>> speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't need to
>>>>>>>> change very often.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image and
>>>>>>> then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea
>>>>>>>> was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake
>>>>>>>> of consistency?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the
>>>>>>> base Docker images.
>>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and
>>>>>>> aarch64 builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull Request
>>>>>>> for more comments!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers
>>>>>>>>>>>> (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis.
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants to
>>>>>>>>>>>> take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need help!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've found
>>>>>>>>>> as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on
>>>>>>>>>> x86_64, so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will
>>>>>>>>>> be extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head how
>>>>>>>>>> to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor
>>>>>>>>> with QEMU.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64 (emulation!)
>>>>>>>>> ~40mins
>>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7
>>>>>>>>> and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions:
>>>>>> they will
>>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the same
>>>>>> subdirectory
>>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>>>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are
>>>>>> out of date.
>>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be slower
>>>>>>>>>> than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

Hello,

Here is the PR: https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/pull/3263
I will add some more documentation about the new setup.
Any feedback is welcome!

Regards,
Martin

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 9:55 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 20:15 Guillaume Quintard <
> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>
>> is that script running as root?
>>
>
> Yes.
> I also added 'USER root' to its Dockerfile and '-u 0' to 'docker run'
> arguments but it still doesn't work.
> The x86 build is OK.
> It must be something in the base docker image.
> I've disabled the Alpine aarch64 job for now.
> I'll send a PR tomorrow!
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>
>> --
>> Guillaume Quintard
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools'
>>> and the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual
>>> packing jobs.
>>> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>>>
>>> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
>>> ]0; DEBUG: 4
>>> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using abuild
>>> 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>>> >>> varnish: Checking sanity of /package/APKBUILD...
>>> >>> WARNING: varnish: No maintainer
>>> >>> varnish: Analyzing dependencies...
>>> 0% %
>>> ############################################>>> varnish: Installing for
>>> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
>>> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>> >>> ERROR: varnish: builddeps failed
>>> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>
>>> Google suggested to do this:
>>> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
>>> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>>>
>>> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>>>
>>> Any hints ?
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide
>>>> us with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
>>>> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand,
>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>>>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>>>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>>>> --
>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>>>> It is called at:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>>>> In my branch at:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>>>
>>>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for Alpine
>>>>> is fine.
>>>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can
>>>>>>>>> possibly speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't
>>>>>>>>> need to change very often.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image
>>>>>>>> and then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The idea
>>>>>>>>> was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the sake
>>>>>>>>> of consistency?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the
>>>>>>>> base Docker images.
>>>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and
>>>>>>>> aarch64 builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull
>>>>>>>> Request for more comments!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need
>>>>>>>>>>>> help!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've
>>>>>>>>>>> found as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on
>>>>>>>>>>> x86_64, so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will
>>>>>>>>>>> be extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head
>>>>>>>>>>> how to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor
>>>>>>>>>> with QEMU.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64
>>>>>>>>>> (emulation!) ~40mins
>>>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS 7
>>>>>>>>>> and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions:
>>>>>>> they will
>>>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the
>>>>>>> same subdirectory
>>>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>>>>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files are
>>>>>>> out of date.
>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be
>>>>>>>>>>> slower than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>

El jue., 26 mar. 2020 a las 10:15, Martin Grigorov (<
martin.grigorov@gmail.com>) escribió:

> Hello,
>
> Here is the PR: https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/pull/3263
> I will add some more documentation about the new setup.
> Any feedback is welcome!
>

Nice work, Martin!

Gracias!
Emilio


>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 9:55 PM Martin Grigorov <martin.grigorov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 20:15 Guillaume Quintard <
>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> is that script running as root?
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
>> I also added 'USER root' to its Dockerfile and '-u 0' to 'docker run'
>> arguments but it still doesn't work.
>> The x86 build is OK.
>> It must be something in the base docker image.
>> I've disabled the Alpine aarch64 job for now.
>> I'll send a PR tomorrow!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools'
>>>> and the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual
>>>> packing jobs.
>>>> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>>>>
>>>> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
>>>> ]0; DEBUG: 4
>>>> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using
>>>> abuild 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>>>> >>> varnish: Checking sanity of /package/APKBUILD...
>>>> >>> WARNING: varnish: No maintainer
>>>> >>> varnish: Analyzing dependencies...
>>>> 0% %
>>>> ############################################>>> varnish: Installing for
>>>> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
>>>> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>> >>> ERROR: varnish: builddeps failed
>>>> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>
>>>> Google suggested to do this:
>>>> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
>>>> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>>>>
>>>> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>>>>
>>>> Any hints ?
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide
>>>>> us with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
>>>>> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand,
>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>>>>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>>>>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>>>>> It is called at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>>>>> In my branch at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for
>>>>>> Alpine is fine.
>>>>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can
>>>>>>>>>> possibly speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't
>>>>>>>>>> need to change very often.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image
>>>>>>>>> and then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The
>>>>>>>>>> idea was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the
>>>>>>>>>> sake of consistency?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the
>>>>>>>>> base Docker images.
>>>>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and
>>>>>>>>> aarch64 builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull
>>>>>>>>> Request for more comments!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need
>>>>>>>>>>>>> help!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've
>>>>>>>>>>>> found as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on
>>>>>>>>>>>> x86_64, so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml will
>>>>>>>>>>>> be extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom Docker
>>>>>>>>>>>> images
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head
>>>>>>>>>>>> how to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor
>>>>>>>>>>> with QEMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64
>>>>>>>>>>> (emulation!) ~40mins
>>>>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS
>>>>>>>>>>> 7 and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions:
>>>>>>>> they will
>>>>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the
>>>>>>>> same subdirectory
>>>>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning: libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS
>>>>>>>> multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files
>>>>>>>> are out of date.
>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be
>>>>>>>>>>>> slower than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hi,

When we could expect the new aarch64 binaries at
https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache/varnish-weekly ?

Gracias!
Emilio

El mié., 15 abr. 2020 a las 14:33, Emilio Fernandes (<
emilio.fernandes70@gmail.com>) escribió:

>
>
> El jue., 26 mar. 2020 a las 10:15, Martin Grigorov (<
> martin.grigorov@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here is the PR: https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/pull/3263
>> I will add some more documentation about the new setup.
>> Any feedback is welcome!
>>
>
> Nice work, Martin!
>
> Gracias!
> Emilio
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 9:55 PM Martin Grigorov <
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 20:15 Guillaume Quintard <
>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> is that script running as root?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>> I also added 'USER root' to its Dockerfile and '-u 0' to 'docker run'
>>> arguments but it still doesn't work.
>>> The x86 build is OK.
>>> It must be something in the base docker image.
>>> I've disabled the Alpine aarch64 job for now.
>>> I'll send a PR tomorrow!
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools'
>>>>> and the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual
>>>>> packing jobs.
>>>>> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>>>>>
>>>>> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
>>>>> ]0; DEBUG: 4
>>>>> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using
>>>>> abuild 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>>>>> >>> varnish: Checking sanity of /package/APKBUILD...
>>>>> >>> WARNING: varnish: No maintainer
>>>>> >>> varnish: Analyzing dependencies...
>>>>> 0% %
>>>>> ############################################>>> varnish: Installing for
>>>>> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
>>>>> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
>>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>> >>> ERROR: varnish: builddeps failed
>>>>> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
>>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>>
>>>>> Google suggested to do this:
>>>>> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
>>>>> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>>>>>
>>>>> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>>>>>
>>>>> Any hints ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to provide
>>>>>> us with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work for
>>>>>> everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand,
>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>>>>>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>>>>>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>>>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>>>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>>>>>> It is called at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>>>>>> In my branch at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for
>>>>>>> Alpine is fine.
>>>>>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can
>>>>>>>>>>> possibly speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't
>>>>>>>>>>> need to change very often.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image
>>>>>>>>>> and then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The
>>>>>>>>>>> idea was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is my
>>>>>>>>>> first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the
>>>>>>>>>>> sake of consistency?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the
>>>>>>>>>> base Docker images.
>>>>>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and
>>>>>>>>>> aarch64 builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull
>>>>>>>>>> Request for more comments!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64 containers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic in Travis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone wants
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to handle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>> found as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> x86_64, so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and then
>>>>>>>>>>>>> builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> build steps
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml
>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Docker images
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head
>>>>>>>>>>>>> how to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor
>>>>>>>>>>>> with QEMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64
>>>>>>>>>>>> (emulation!) ~40mins
>>>>>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for CentOS
>>>>>>>>>>>> 7 and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions:
>>>>>>>>> they will
>>>>>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the
>>>>>>>>> same subdirectory
>>>>>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning:
>>>>>>>>> libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files
>>>>>>>>> are out of date.
>>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> slower than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>>>> runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any commit in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way to reserve
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ola,

Pål just pushed Monday's batch, so you get amd64 and aarch64 packages for
all the platforms. Go forth and test, the paint is still very wet.

Bonne journée!

--
Guillaume Quintard


On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:28 AM Emilio Fernandes <
emilio.fernandes70@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> When we could expect the new aarch64 binaries at
> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache/varnish-weekly ?
>
> Gracias!
> Emilio
>
> El mié., 15 abr. 2020 a las 14:33, Emilio Fernandes (<
> emilio.fernandes70@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>>
>>
>> El jue., 26 mar. 2020 a las 10:15, Martin Grigorov (<
>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com>) escribió:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Here is the PR: https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/pull/3263
>>> I will add some more documentation about the new setup.
>>> Any feedback is welcome!
>>>
>>
>> Nice work, Martin!
>>
>> Gracias!
>> Emilio
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 9:55 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 20:15 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> is that script running as root?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>> I also added 'USER root' to its Dockerfile and '-u 0' to 'docker run'
>>>> arguments but it still doesn't work.
>>>> The x86 build is OK.
>>>> It must be something in the base docker image.
>>>> I've disabled the Alpine aarch64 job for now.
>>>> I'll send a PR tomorrow!
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've moved 'dist' job to be executed in parallel with 'tar_pkg_tools'
>>>>>> and the results from both are shared in the workspace for the actual
>>>>>> packing jobs.
>>>>>> Now the new error for aarch64-apk job is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Updating the sha512sums in APKBUILD...
>>>>>> ]0; DEBUG: 4
>>>>>> ]0;abuild: varnish >>> varnish: Building /varnish 6.4.0-r1 (using
>>>>>> abuild 3.5.0-r0) started Wed, 25 Mar 2020 09:22:02 +0000
>>>>>> >>> varnish: Checking sanity of /package/APKBUILD...
>>>>>> >>> WARNING: varnish: No maintainer
>>>>>> >>> varnish: Analyzing dependencies...
>>>>>> 0% %
>>>>>> ############################################>>> varnish: Installing for
>>>>>> build: build-base gcc libc-dev libgcc pcre-dev ncurses-dev libedit-dev
>>>>>> py-docutils linux-headers libunwind-dev python py3-sphinx
>>>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>>> >>> ERROR: varnish: builddeps failed
>>>>>> ]0; >>> varnish: Uninstalling dependencies...
>>>>>> Waiting for repository lock
>>>>>> ERROR: Unable to lock database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>>> ERROR: Failed to open apk database: Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Google suggested to do this:
>>>>>> rm -rf /var/cache/apk
>>>>>> mkdir /var/cache/apk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It fails at 'abuild -r' -
>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/b62c357b389c0e1e31e9c001cbffb55090c2e49f/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L61
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any hints ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 AM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you are pointing at the `dist` job, whose sole role is to
>>>>>>> provide us with a dist tarball, so we don't need that command line to work
>>>>>>> for everyone, just for that specific platform.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the other hand,
>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L168 is
>>>>>>> closer to what you want, `distcheck` will be call on all platform, and you
>>>>>>> can see that it has the `--with-unwind` argument.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:05 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 17:19 Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Compare your configure line with what's currently in use (or the
>>>>>>>>> apkbuild file), there are a few options (with-unwind, without-jemalloc,
>>>>>>>>> etc.) That need to be set
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The configure line comes from "./autogen.des":
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/autogen.des#L35-L42
>>>>>>>> It is called at:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/4f9d8bed6b24bf9ee900c754f37615fdba1c44db/.circleci/config.yml#L40
>>>>>>>> In my branch at:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/blob/4b4626ee9cc366b032a45f27b54d77176125ef03/.circleci/make-apk-packages.sh#L26
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It fails only on aarch64 for Alpine Linux. The x86_64 build for
>>>>>>>> Alpine is fine.
>>>>>>>> AARCH64 for CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 are also fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020, 08:05 Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:00 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 8:01 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for that.
>>>>>>>>>>>> A few remarks and questions:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - how much time does the "docker build" step takes? We can
>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly speed things up by push images to the dockerhub, as they don't
>>>>>>>>>>>> need to change very often.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely such optimization would be a good thing to do!
>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, with 'machine' executor it fetches the base image
>>>>>>>>>>> and then builds all the Docker layers again and again.
>>>>>>>>>>> Here are the timings:
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Spinning up a VM - around 10secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) prepare env variables - 0secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) checkout code (varnish-cache) - 5secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 4) activate QEMU - 2secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 5) build packages
>>>>>>>>>>> 5.1) x86 deb - 3m 30secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 5.2) x86 rpm - 2m 50secs
>>>>>>>>>>> 5.3) aarch64 rpm - 35mins
>>>>>>>>>>> 5.4) aarch64 deb - 45mins
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - any reason why you clone pkg-varnish-cache in each job? The
>>>>>>>>>>>> idea was to have it cloned once in tar-pkg-tools for consistency and
>>>>>>>>>>>> reproducibility, which we lose here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I will extract the common steps once I see it working. This is
>>>>>>>>>>> my first CircleCI project and I still find my ways in it!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - do we want to change things for the amd64 platforms for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> sake of consistency?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So far there is nothing specific for amd4 or aarch64, except the
>>>>>>>>>>> base Docker images.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example make-deb-packages.sh is reused for both amd64 and
>>>>>>>>>>> aarch64 builds. Same for -rpm- and now for -apk- (alpine).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Once I feel the change is almost finished I will open a Pull
>>>>>>>>>>> Request for more comments!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:25 AM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:31 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 4:35 PM Martin Grigorov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> martin.grigorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaume,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:23 PM Guillaume Quintard <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guillaume@varnish-software.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Offering arm64 packages requires a few things:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible code (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - arm64-compatible package framework (all good in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/pkg-varnish-cache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to build the packages (uhoh, see below)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - infrastructure to store and deliver (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://packagecloud.io/varnishcache)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, everything is in place, expect for the third point. At
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment, there are two concurrent CI implementations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - travis:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.travis.yml It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the historical one, and currently only runs compilation+test for OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually it tests Linux AMD64 and ARM64 too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - circleci:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache/blob/master/.circleci/config.yml the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new kid on the block, that builds all the packages and distchecks for all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the packaged platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that cirecleci doesn't support arm64
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> containers (for now?), so we would need to re-implement the packaging logic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Travis. It's not a big problem, but it's currently not a priority on my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I am totally ready to provide help if someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants to take that up. The added benefit it that Travis would be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handle everything and we can retire the circleci experiment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look in the coming days and ask you if I need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've took a look at the current setup and here is what I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found as problems and possible solutions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Circle CI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.1) problem - the 'machine' and 'Docker' executors run on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> x86_64, so there is no way to build the packages in a "native" environment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2) possible solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1) use multiarch cross build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.2) use 'machine' executor that registers QEMU via
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/multiarch/qemu-user-static/ and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then builds and runs a custom Docker image that executes a shell script
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the build steps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will look something like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/yukimochi-containers/alpine-vpnserver/blob/69bb0a612c9df3e4ba78064d114751b760f0df9d/.circleci/config.yml#L19-L38 but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of uploading the Docker image as a last step it will run it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The RPM and DEB build related code from current config.yml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be extracted into shell scripts which will be copied in the custom
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Docker images
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From these two possible ways I have better picture in my head
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how to do 1.2.2, but I don't mind going deep in 1.2.1 if this is what you'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've decided to stay with Circle CI and use 'machine' executor
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with QEMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The changed config.yml could be seen at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/martin-g/varnish-cache/tree/feature/aarch64-packages/.circleci and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the build at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/martin-g/varnish-cache/71/workflows/3a275d79-62a9-48b4-9aef-1585de1c87c8
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The builds on x86 arch take 3-4 mins, but for aarch64
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (emulation!) ~40mins
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For now the jobs just build the .deb & .rpm packages for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 18.04, both amd64 and aarch64.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> TODOs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - migrate Alpine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Build on Alpine aarch64 fails with:
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> automake: this behaviour will change in future Automake versions:
>>>>>>>>>> they will
>>>>>>>>>> automake: unconditionally cause object files to be placed in the
>>>>>>>>>> same subdirectory
>>>>>>>>>> automake: of the corresponding sources.
>>>>>>>>>> automake: project, to avoid future incompatibilities.
>>>>>>>>>> parallel-tests: installing 'build-aux/test-driver'
>>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:12: warning:
>>>>>>>>>> libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS multiply defined in condition TRUE ...
>>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/automake_boilerplate.am:19: ...
>>>>>>>>>> 'libvmod_debug_la_LDFLAGS' previously defined here
>>>>>>>>>> lib/libvmod_debug/Makefile.am:9: 'lib/libvmod_debug/
>>>>>>>>>> automake_boilerplate.am' included from here
>>>>>>>>>> + autoconf
>>>>>>>>>> + CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh
>>>>>>>>>> + export CONFIG_SHELL
>>>>>>>>>> + ./configure '--prefix=/opt/varnish' '--mandir=/opt/varnish/man'
>>>>>>>>>> --enable-maintainer-mode --enable-developer-warnings
>>>>>>>>>> --enable-debugging-symbols --enable-dependency-tracking
>>>>>>>>>> --with-persistent-storage --quiet
>>>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: dot not found - build will fail if svg files
>>>>>>>>>> are out of date.
>>>>>>>>>> configure: WARNING: No system jemalloc found, using system malloc
>>>>>>>>>> configure: error: Could not find backtrace() support
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone know a workaround ?
>>>>>>>>>> I use multiarch/alpine:aarch64-edge as a base Docker image
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - store the packages as CircleCI artifacts
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - anything else that is still missing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding more architectures would be as easy as adding a new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile with a base image from the respective type.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Travis CI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1) problems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.1) generally Travis is slower than Circle!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Althought if we use CircleCI 'machine' executor it will be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slower than the current 'Docker' executor!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.1.2) Travis supports only Ubuntu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Current setup at CircleCI uses CentOS 7.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess the build steps won't have problems on Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) GitHub Actions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GH Actions does not support ARM64 but it supports self hosted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ARM64 runners
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.1) The problem is that there is no way to make a self
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hosted runner really private. I.e. if someone forks Varnish Cache any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commit in the fork will trigger builds on the arm64 node. There is no way
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to reserve the runner only for commits against
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/varnishcache/varnish-cache
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you see other problems or maybe different ways ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have preferences which way to go ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guillaume Quintard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>