Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow running on arches unsupported by the master distro and disabling arches (RISC-V) #494

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

MisterDA
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@MisterDA MisterDA requested a review from mtelvers July 15, 2022 15:16
@MisterDA
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe we should be using # syntax=docker/dockerfile:1.4 or # syntax=docker/dockerfile:1 instead of the sha.

lib/buildkit_syntax.ml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@MisterDA MisterDA force-pushed the risvc64 branch 4 times, most recently from 85f8013 to e751514 Compare July 15, 2022 17:41
Copy link
Member

@tmcgilchrist tmcgilchrist left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Too early to enable this for CI, there is not sufficient capacity in the riscv64 pool.

@MisterDA
Copy link
Contributor Author

Of course, let's keep it for later 🐊

@MisterDA MisterDA changed the title Enable riscv64 Allow running on arches unsupported by the master distro and disabling arches (RISC-V) Jan 18, 2023
@MisterDA
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've changed this PR to allow running CI jobs on architectures unsupported by the master distro (Ubuntu supports RISC-V but Debian didn't (at the time of writing)) and disabling a list of architectures (say, RISC-V).

Enables running jobs on Ubuntu riscv64 since the master
distro (Debian) doesn't support them.
@shonfeder
Copy link
Contributor

Given the conflict, how stale this PR is, and the fact that the motivating issue behind is not evident, I'm going to close this up for now. Please open an issue to explain the need for this functionality and the impact of not having it, if still relevant.

@shonfeder shonfeder closed this Jul 9, 2024
@tmcgilchrist
Copy link
Member

The motivation behind this change was to allow ocaml-ci to build on RISC-V hardware, with the understanding that ocaml-ci should support all Tier-1 OS/architecture combinations. At the time this was opened we only had 2 underpowered SiFive machines, now we have 6 machines in the RISC-V pool it seems more viable to provide ocaml-ci builds. That would depend on the capacity available in that pool, I haven't checked what the usage of it is.

The complicating factor is how ocaml-ci derives the opam vars for a build. It assumes they can be derived from the master distribution (Debian) but for RISC-V it isn't supported and it needs to be worked around. That is what #494 (comment) is talking about. In general deriving opam vars for builds could use some work since MacOS and FreeBSD end up being hardcoded in https://github.com/ocurrent/ocaml-ci/blob/f7d66cc929abd21bc390ae74c4579eafeafb503e/service/conf.ml when ideally they should be derived from the containers and ocaml-version dependencies. Happy to provide more details :-)

@shonfeder
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for the context! I've opened #955 to track. I'd have no problems at all with this PR being reopened if someone has the free cycles to wrap it up.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants