unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

^-Ubermensch-^ · 2016-07-07 19:51:25

I have a problem with linux-ck-skylake:

         -cpu
          description: CPU
          product: Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G4520 @ 3.60GHz
          vendor: Intel Corp.
          physical id: 41
          bus info: cpu@0
          version: Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G4520 @ 3.60GHz
          serial: To Be Filled By O.E.M.
          slot: U3E1
          size: 3600MHz
          capacity: 3600MHz
          width: 64 bits
          clock: 100MHz
          capabilities: x86-64 fpu fpu_exception wp vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp constant_tsc art arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 sdbg cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch intel_pt tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase tsc_adjust erms invpcid rdseed smap clflushopt xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 dtherm arat pln pts hwp hwp_notify hwp_act_window hwp_epp cpufreq
          configuration: cores=2 enabledcores=2 threads=2

gcc -c -Q -march=native --help=target | grep march
  -march=                     		skylake

The kernel don't boot and crash. Generic kernel boot normally.

Last edited by ^-Ubermensch-^ (2016-07-07 19:53:06)

graysky · 2016-07-07 22:43:10

Hmm... we have other ck-skylake users experiencing no issues with the packages. I'm not sure what to tell you. Does the pentium (G4520) somehow lack something that the core-ix chips do not?

^-Ubermensch-^ · 2016-07-07 22:56:21

I don't know, this g4520 has Pentium brand with dual core processor

graysky · 2016-07-07 23:10:44

Does the ck-generic kernel boot normally? You mentioned "the generic kernel" in your post but I wasn't sure if that was the ARCH or ck kernel.

^-Ubermensch-^ · 2016-07-07 23:13:38

Yes all ok with generic linux-ck

graysky · 2016-07-07 23:43:41

OK. So the issue is with the skylake optimizations and your CPU for whatever reason. I don't have too much insight unfortunately.

Xyne · 2016-07-10 22:14:57

Hey graysky,

For the last few months I have been working on an extensible pacman wrapper named Pacboy that I have now uploaded for testing and development here. One of the features is that it is easy to add build support for Pacman binary repos via an extension module. The easiest way is to make the SRCINFO and PKGBUILD files available on the repo host then subclass the extension for my own repos. Users can then build packages using familiar pacman syntax.

Relevant features for repo-ck would be that you can select certain package to always be built with every upgrade and you can easily customize each package via build script snippets (e.g. apply patches, change options, use different VCS branches). I understand that one of the advantages of the optimized compiled repos is avoiding compilation, but some people might appreciate it (tweakers & ricers, anyone on unsupported processors). Just having access to the PKGBUILDs via a common command-line interface would be nice even when using the binary packages.

So, would you be interesting in such an extension? If so, feel free to take the discussion to the Pacboy thread to avoid clutter here. I hope that you don't mind the "intrusion".

Regards,
Xyne

eschwartz · 2016-07-10 22:20:12

Um...

graysky wrote:

Given the popularity of the linux-ck package, I have followed nous' lead and created an unofficial repo containing precompiled binary versions of the linux-ck and related packages for community use. I wrote a wiki article that has instructions, available packages, etc. Note that the repo contains a generic package and many CPU-specific optimized packages! Please read the wiki page linked below for more details.

It's all in the AUR. By definition.

Last edited by eschwartz (2016-07-10 22:21:10)

Xyne · 2016-07-10 22:38:28

Eschwartz wrote:

Um...
graysky wrote:
Given the popularity of the linux-ck package, I have followed nous' lead and created an unofficial repo containing precompiled binary versions of the linux-ck and related packages for community use. I wrote a wiki article that has instructions, available packages, etc. Note that the repo contains a generic package and many CPU-specific optimized packages! Please read the wiki page linked below for more details.
It's all in the AUR. By definition.

How is it in the AUR "by definition"?

There would be use-cases where one wants transparent building of the repo-ck packages without enabling full AUR support. Anyway, I'm just letting people know that the possibility exists.

eschwartz · 2016-07-11 04:51:04

Xyne wrote:

How is it in the AUR "by definition"?

Well, if the purpose of the repo is to precompile a series of AUR packages, then by definition those packages are in the AUR.
But really, the point is that one way or another, they are there.

There would be use-cases where one wants transparent building of the repo-ck packages without enabling full AUR support. Anyway, I'm just letting people know that the possibility exists.

Maybe, but I wouldn't automatically assume it is worth the effort for the repository maintainer given that the sources are already in the AUR. And this is yet another way of providing the same information again.
And how much of a burden is it for a user to enable full AUR support?

Xyne · 2016-07-11 21:00:54

Eschwartz wrote:

Xyne wrote:
How is it in the AUR "by definition"?
Well, if the purpose of the repo is to precompile a series of AUR packages, then by definition those packages are in the AUR.
But really, the point is that one way or another, they are there.

That is not mentioned in the first post or the wiki page. But yeah, ok, they're there.

Eschwartz wrote:

There would be use-cases where one wants transparent building of the repo-ck packages without enabling full AUR support. Anyway, I'm just letting people know that the possibility exists.
Maybe, but I wouldn't automatically assume it is worth the effort for the repository maintainer given that the sources are already in the AUR. And this is yet another way of providing the same information again.
And how much of a burden is it for a user to enable full AUR support?

Any automated build system can trivially provide PKGBUILDs and SRCINFO along with built packages. The PKGBUILDs are clearly already there and SRCINFO can be generated when the package is built. I'm not arguing for someone to do this, just pointing out that there is only negligible effort involved. Besides, surely it would be for the repo maintainer to say what is or isn't "worth the effort".

Beyond that, I never said that those have to come from the repo site. If the repo maintainer is also the AUR maintainer then trust is implicit, so the AUR could be used and the code is essentially already there. Now that I'm aware of this particular situation (binary repo for AUR package subset), I will likely add a generalized build extender to handle it.

And it's no burden at all to enable full AUR support (beyond typing a line in a config file). The was one of security. The AUR is untrusted, whereas a user who enables someone's binary repo inherently trusts that person. Pacboy/Bauerbill do prompt the user to inspect and trust AUR and whatever other third-party source that may be labelled untrusted, but the point was that it would be better to have a direct and limited access to the PKGBUILDs provided by the repo maintainer rather than enabling a full third-party multi-user source. I expect that there is a subset of users who would want full build support for the linux-ck repo via pacman commands without AUR support.

Anyway, again, it was just an idea that I think some may find useful. I'm not arguing for it. At the same time, I don't understand why you are arguing against it as I don't see how it would affect you. I'll leave it at that before this derails further. If graysky or anyone else shows some interest in this, follow up in the Pacboy thread. Sorry for the noise.

graysky · 2016-07-11 21:24:33

Replied in email to Xyne.

nomorewindows · 2016-07-12 20:21:39

Update to package, 4.6.4 still having same keyring and kernel initramfs module building problems, even on a different machine. Maybe I should try pacman --debug?
Pacman --debug did help in fact.
The keys for linux-ck-kx-headers and nvidia-304xx-ck-kx are the same and more complete keys than linux-ck-kx. They are longer than linux-ck-kx and contain the entire key not just part of it. So that's one part of the problem. The other part is why it can't build the modules with the initramfs.

Last edited by nomorewindows (2016-07-12 20:29:09)

graysky · 2016-07-12 21:38:51

I use the same key for all package signing../.

# pacman-key -r 5EE46C4C && pacman-key --lsign-key 5EE46C4C

nomorewindows · 2016-07-12 21:59:32

graysky wrote:

I use the same key for all package signing../.
# pacman-key -r 5EE46C4C && pacman-key --lsign-key 5EE46C4C

pacman --debug shows the key for the linux-ck package as

88A032865EE46C4C

but the other two shows the entire rsa2048 key.

graysky · 2016-07-12 22:39:43

Odd... try this as root:

pacman -Syy && pacman -Su

nomorewindows · 2016-07-13 00:45:54

graysky wrote:

Odd... try this as root:
pacman -Syy && pacman -Su

No difference. Strange that the key and the package doesn't want to build the image correctly.

graysky · 2016-07-13 00:56:22

Post the output of your pacman command that is giving the errors please.

nomorewindows · 2016-07-13 01:18:02

graysky wrote:

Post the output of your pacman command that is giving the errors please.

How to grab X terminal output?

graysky · 2016-07-13 01:20:19

Just open a terminal... should be able to snag all the output.

nomorewindows · 2016-07-13 01:27:18

graysky wrote:

Just open a terminal... should be able to snag all the output.

I can highlight, but I can't grab it into copy&paste, not even to gvim.

graysky · 2016-07-13 21:36:38

Just selecting the text copies it. If you middle click in your fav editors (vim or whatever) it should paste.

nomorewindows · 2016-07-13 22:33:03

I were doing that, but for some reason it kept pulling up something else in the clipboard.

pacman -Su
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...

Packages (3) linux-ck-kx-4.6.4-1  linux-ck-kx-headers-4.6.4-1
             nvidia-304xx-ck-kx-304.131-9

Total Installed Size:  115.69 MiB
Net Upgrade Size:        1.51 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] 
(3/3) checking keys in keyring                     [######################] 100%
(3/3) checking package integrity                   [######################] 100%
error: linux-ck-kx: signature from "graysky (used to sign repo-ck packages) <graysky@archlinux.us>" is invalid
:: File /var/cache/pacman/pkg/linux-ck-kx-4.6.4-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz is corrupted (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)).
Do you want to delete it? [Y/n] n
error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

graysky · 2016-07-13 22:39:29

OK... go ahead and delete the package, likely a failed download.

nomorewindows · 2016-07-13 23:36:51

graysky wrote:

OK... go ahead and delete the package, likely a failed download.

It did it with 4.6.3, as well as 4.6.4 and ck vs. ck-kx.
pacman -Su --debug

debug: key 88A032865EE46C4C found in cache
checking package integrity...
debug: found cached pkg: /var/cache/pacman/pkg/linux-ck-4.6.4-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
debug: sig data: <blah blah>
debug: checking signature for /var/cache/pacman/pkg/linux-ck-4.6.4-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
debug: 1 signatures returned
debug: fingerprint: 88A032865EE46C4C
debug: summary: red
debug: status: Bad signature
debug: timestamp: 0
debug: exp_timestamp: 0
debug: validity: unknown; reason: Success
debug: key: 4E22BB637E26407D5EE550988A032865EE46C4C, graysky (used to sign repo-ck packages) <graysky@archlinux.us>, owner_trust unknown, disabled 0
debug: signature is not valid

Also cut & paste from terminal is not consistent.

Arch Linux

#2751 2016-07-07 19:51:25

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2752 2016-07-07 22:43:10

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2753 2016-07-07 22:56:21

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2754 2016-07-07 23:10:44

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2755 2016-07-07 23:13:38

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2756 2016-07-07 23:43:41

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2757 2016-07-10 22:14:57

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2758 2016-07-10 22:20:12

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2759 2016-07-10 22:38:28

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2760 2016-07-11 04:51:04

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2761 2016-07-11 21:00:54

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2762 2016-07-11 21:24:33

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2763 2016-07-12 20:21:39

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2764 2016-07-12 21:38:51

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2765 2016-07-12 21:59:32

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2766 2016-07-12 22:39:43

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2767 2016-07-13 00:45:54

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2768 2016-07-13 00:56:22

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2769 2016-07-13 01:18:02

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2770 2016-07-13 01:20:19

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2771 2016-07-13 01:27:18

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2772 2016-07-13 21:36:38

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2773 2016-07-13 22:33:03

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2774 2016-07-13 22:39:29

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#2775 2016-07-13 23:36:51

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

Board footer