-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
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
Enable runs on linux aarch64 #144
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
d625924
to
9a63951
Compare
9a63951
to
7327756
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From a brief test locally, it looks like TOML will parse the .
correctly as long as we put the artifact name in double quotes.
Co-authored-by: Dilum Aluthge <dilum@aluthge.com>
Xref #97 |
Can we get a AWS aarch64 instance started up and added as a repo self-hosted runner, so we can add that to CI here? Who's good to ping for that? |
For CI here, we should just use one of the Buildkite When it's time to actually run the PkgEval job, then we can spin up the AWS instances. |
@maleadt Do you need me to add |
|
|
Alternatively, we can make a rootfs image for Buildkite that has xvfb in it. |
|
I'm not sure it's that simple. We should only launch a single xvfb instance, and it has to be accessible to each sandbox by mounting/exposing the necessary sockets and environment flags. Not impossible, just a bit of work. FWIW, running a virtual X server in each container is possible but probably generates quite a bit of overhead. For aarch64 testing it's probably easier to disable xvfb for now and just fail tests of the (couple of) packages that require an active display server. |
Sounds good for a first run. Following that, perhaps PkgEval could first check for the presence of xvfb in any .yml files in the repo under test, and if so run with it |
Probably good to |
I'm not sure I understand. The requirement is implicit because, e.g., libcairo.so accessing X11 libraries. No package currently explicitly requests a display server. |
AFAIK quite a few do during CI testing |
Oh wait, was the rootfs change intended for the buildkite runners and not for use by PkgEval? I guess so, but was confused since PkgEval uses those images too. Let's try restarting the job. |
Yeah, sorry for the confusion. I was proposing to change the rootfs that the Buildkite agent is running inside. PkgEval will continue to use the |
Do the runners automatically pick up the new image? It's still reporting:
|
No, I have to change it manually. I'll push to this branch. |
@staticfloat What have I done wrong here? |
It works with a dummy command (e.g. |
I've disabled the pipeline (emptied the steps) since it otherwise marks all builds, even outside of this PR, as broken. |
It's telling you, via the error at the top of the buildkite page: You have two options:
|
With help from @DilumAluthge