Error during evebox installation

@support_team
Can somebody confirm it?
Is the problem based on arm package?

cc @dev_team

Well…

Seems that Evebox 0.10.2 has not yet compiled for armv7…

1 Like

Yes, the latest evebox version for arm is not on the repos. I think Michael is right on the spot about compilation.

1 Like

OK, we will try to compile it. Can somebody explain how to add it to the repo? A PR at GitHub?

Thanks Michael

2 Likes

I can upload it for you, or grant you upload access :slight_smile:

1 Like

Thanks, we send you a message if we have built it.

2 Likes

@smutje1179, @m.traeumner, thank you for sending me the RPM :heavy_heart_exclamation:

Before uploading it to nethserver-testing, please help me to check the following information: /cc @dz00te @giacomo

[davidep@davidep1 ~]$ rpm -qpi Downloads/evebox-0.10.2-1.armv7l.rpm 
Name        : evebox
Version     : 0.10.2
Release     : 1
Architecture: armv7hnl
Install Date: (not installed)
Group       : default
Size        : 14481834
License     : unknown
Signature   : (none)
Source RPM  : evebox-0.10.2-1.src.rpm
Build Date  : Wed 24 Jul 2019 21:16:54 CEST
Build Host  : localhost
Relocations : / 
Packager    : <root@bpi-iot-ros-ai>
Vendor      : root@bpi-iot-ros-ai
URL         : http://example.com/no-uri-given
Summary     : no description given
Description :
no description given
  1. The Release is missing the repo suffix (e.g .ns7): shouldn’t harm but for the final release I prefer to see it, expecially in the file name (i.e. evebox-0.10.2-1.ns7.armsomething.rpm). To fix it, just edit the .spec file and set the Release to 1.ns7. RPM packages conventions make use of the dist macro: see this example.
  2. The file name arch is armv7l and differs from the Architecture: armv7hnl tag: is it an issue?

Note: when an armv7hl arch package is uploaded it ends up in armhfp/ repository automatically.

1 Like

Hello

i think i can take care of this today, in the evening, but there is a chance that i can only work on this tomorrow…:pensive:

Greetings

Björn

2 Likes

Hello Davide !

I’ve finally managed to upload a rpm file to your cloud !

I hope nothing is going to explode with this rpm :slight_smile:

If you didn’t get a file : Write me a note ! Then i will try again to upload it !

Greetings

Björn

PS : Thanks to all who have supported me !

3 Likes

Hello Davide !

I’ve uploaded one rpm which is hopefully better!

Greeting

Björn

3 Likes

Got it!

$ rpm -qpi evebox-0.10.2-1.ns7.armv7l.rpm
Name        : evebox
Version     : 0.10.2
Release     : 1.ns7
Architecture: armv7hnl
Install Date: (not installed)
Group       : default
Size        : 14481834
License     : unknown
Signature   : (none)
Source RPM  : evebox-0.10.2-1.ns7.src.rpm
Build Date  : Thu 25 Jul 2019 17:56:14 CEST
Build Host  : localhost
Relocations : / 
Packager    : <pi@bpi-iot-ros-ai>
Vendor      : pi@bpi-iot-ros-ai
URL         : http://example.com/no-uri-given
Summary     : no description given
Description :
no description given

I’ve a question: the arch is armv7hnl, should it go under armhfp?

Hello Davide !

Yes, i think so. Do i have to change it in the spec of the rpm?

Greetings

1 Like

I don’t know what is the correct value :innocent: By now we have a armv7hl => armhfp rule (missing n)

Is the “n” just a typo? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29166619/differences-between-arm-versions-armv7-only#29167402

Hello Davide

I’ve tried to figure out what this name “armv7hnl” means without any results.

I think this is a valid architecture description because i’ve found on some places the same name (e.g. openmandriva uses the same…).

The problem is that i can not tell you the difference between an “armv7hnl” and a “armv7l” or even if they are compatible to each other…

Greetings

Björn

2 Likes

I think the “n” just mean “neon” with an advanced instruction set.
See this patch and wikipedia.

I’d say yes.

2 Likes

Thank you for your feedback! I’m changing the repository arch rules to match armhfp in a smarter way

@giacomo you’re going to review it :wink:

1 Like

The package is now available from nethserver-testing!

http://packages.nethserver.org/nethserver/7.6.1810/testing/armhfp/Packages/evebox-0.10.2-1.ns7.armv7l.rpm

2 Likes

Installed with

yum install enablerepo=nethserver-testing evebox

Installation works fine but I could choose it for installation at softwarecenter anymore.

@dev_team Is this a normal behaviour

@arm_team Did somebody else tested it? Would be nice if it’s implemented.

@smutje1179 Great work! :grinning:

This Node.js stuff is way out of my comfort-zone, kind of get lost if there is no main.c(pp)

how did you manage node-sass to play-along?