Build arm64 images

[rossburton]

Docker supports arm64, so it would be great if crops could also build arm64 images.

[rewitt1]

Hey @rossburton,

I tried this out: https://travis-ci.com/github/rewitt1/yocto-dockerfiles/builds/173076130.

Since all the distros have arm64 images, they should all work. However, there are failures due to a couple of reasons. It tries to use an x86_64 version of buildtools. I can't try an arm64 version since it seems it isn't published.

The other failure is due to trying to include gcc-multilib and g++-multilib packages in the debian based distros. This could of course be made conditional.

We could choose to not build the distros that need buildtools for arm64, but it would be nice to be able to keep them symmetric.

[rossburton]

Thanks Randy!

I fixed the buildtools thing last week, the 3.2M1 release included arm64 tarballs if you can grab those directly. gcc-multilib just isn't a thing on anything but x86-64, so making that conditional seems sensible.

[rewitt1]

@rossburton,

Looks like this works with the changes I mentioned, and using the milestone buildtools. https://travis-ci.com/github/rewitt1/yocto-dockerfiles/builds/173740817

Are there any plans to add the arm64 buildtools tarballs to 3.1, or do we wait until the October release to try and enable this?

[rossburton]

That's awesome. If I can get docker on my box I'll give it a go. http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=stable/dunfell-nut&id=64a1a6947e0f772772835fd937a9322b7f17551c is queued for the Dunfell branch, so using those is the correct thing to do right now.

…

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 22:11, Randy Witt ***@***.***> wrote: @rossburton <https://github.com/rossburton>, Looks like this works with the changes I mentioned, and using the milestone buildtools. https://travis-ci.com/github/rewitt1/yocto-dockerfiles/builds/173740817 Are there any plans to add the arm64 buildtools tarballs to 3.1, or do we wait until the October release to try and enable this? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#45 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAH5CTGHOEI2FDQWSWND4LRZJIJPANCNFSM4OFQVDYA> .

[jnettlet]

Are there plans to start publishing Aarch64 images? I just found crop and attempted a yocto build on my HoneyComb box and the images failed to start. I am attempting a local build of the images now.

[lgrosz]

@jnettlet Any updates? Did you get the builds working on aarch64?

[moto-timo]

As far as I understand it, we will need a aarch64 host to act as a GitHub Actions runner, both to build the container images and to actually run tests on them. GitHub themselves do not provide any aarch64 runners.

[rossburton]

There are docker container builders that can run inside a qemu-system, but I don't know much more than that.

[keplersj]

Any update on this? It looks like since this issue was last interacted with GitHub has made movements on providing native-ARM runners for open-source projects like this: https://github.blog/changelog/2023-10-30-accelerate-your-ci-cd-with-arm-based-hosted-runners-in-github-actions/, https://resources.github.com/devops/accelerate-your-cicd-with-arm-and-gpu-runners-in-github-actions/

Additionally, it appears that an action exists that abstracts over running commands in an ARM qemu instance: https://github.com/marketplace/actions/arm-runner

[moto-timo]

@keplersj feel free to send a pull request to implement building for ARM.

It appears that the ARM GitHub Actions runners are only preview and you have to sign up for a waitlist.