Closed Bug 723946 Opened 13 years ago Closed 12 years ago

Start producing armv6 Android builds again

Categories

(Infrastructure & Operations Graveyard :: CIDuty, task, P2)

ARM
Android

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: ted, Assigned: armenzg)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [mobile][armv6])

Attachments

(7 files, 4 obsolete files)

3.47 KB, patch
jhopkins
: review+
armenzg
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.09 KB, patch
jhopkins
: review+
armenzg
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.06 KB, patch
nthomas
: review+
nthomas
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.35 KB, patch
bear
: review+
nthomas
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.57 KB, patch
bear
: review+
nthomas
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
9.97 KB, patch
rail
: review+
armenzg
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.67 KB, patch
nthomas
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
We used to have these, and we're fixing up the major things that broke in the interim. We want to get them started again. The old mozconfigs we had might work, if not, they're basically the same as the existing Android builds ones, but with: ac_add_options --with-thumb=no ac_add_options --with-arch=armv6
The only blocker in the dependency tree here that's on RelEng's plate is bug 701708.
Component: Release Engineering → Release Engineering: Platform Support
Priority: -- → P3
QA Contact: release → coop
Whiteboard: [mobile][armv6]
glandium managed to fix our build so that we don't need any changes to the NDK. Setting these builds up should be as simple as copying the existing Android mozconfig and adding: ac_add_options --with-arch=armv6
I don't know much about development but i am big fan of Mozilla and wants a build which will work in my arm6. Can you give me a link of latest build which will work in my phone. Please update a link to me do i can download. Our send me as a statement at Tanmay@live.in
Sorry attachment misplaced with statement
Sorry attachment misplaced with statement
There won't be a build till this bug is fixed. Please use the mobile mailing list [1] for questions. A bug is for coordination of the people who will do the work. [1] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platforms-mobile
Any status updates on this bug?
It think it is the same as bug 697205
Builds can be produced as one off builds, that is what bug 697205 fixed. This is to get vm's to build armv6 builds in the build pool. There is other work that is out competing this bug. Windows 8 builders and signed builds for OS 10.8 users.
Depends on: 757909
I have done a rough patch that could work off the bat. If one of you could land the mozconfig changes for this build I could give it a shot on staging whenever I have a change. For reference, Android uses this: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/default/mobile/android/config/mozconfigs/android/nightly
bug 757909 is adding mozconfigs. I'll ping you when that lands and we can try them in staging.
Can I try it out again?
Will there be a new build or similar to try soon?
(In reply to Gabriela from comment #13) > Will there be a new build or similar to try soon? U can use teh unofficial builds over @ XDA Developers: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1643785&page=11 Disclamer: unofficial, unsupported, form unknown person use at your own risk blah blah blah.... Also its not recommended to ask question here if you don't develop, if you do it too much you could be Banned... cause its like, for Work not questions... PS: Im just random user
(In reply to Please Ignore This Troll from comment #14) > (In reply to Gabriela from comment #13) > > Will there be a new build or similar to try soon? > > U can use teh unofficial builds over @ XDA Developers: > http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1643785&page=11 > Disclamer: unofficial, unsupported, form unknown person use at your own risk > blah blah blah.... > Also its not recommended to ask question here if you don't develop, if you > do it too much you could be Banned... cause its like, for Work not > questions... > PS: Im just random user Many thanks!
(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #12) > Can I try it out again? Yes, sorry, the mozconfigs have landed here: http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/mobile/android/config/mozconfigs/android-armv6/ (In reply to Please Ignore This Troll from comment #14) > Also its not recommended to ask question here if you don't develop, if you > do it too much you could be Banned... cause its like, for Work not > questions... You're unlikely to get banned unless you flaming developers or other uncivil things like that, but yes, it is helpful to developers if you keep bug comments strictly focused on the topic of the bug. The newsgroups are more amenable to discussion, it's better to keep bugs focused on fixing the bug.
This appears to not have used the right mozconfig: retry: Calling <function run_with_timeout at 0xb7d3d0d4> with args: (['bash', '-c', 'if [ -f "mobile/android/config/mozconfigs/android/nightly" ]; then echo Using in-tree mozconfig; cp mobile/android/config/mozconfigs/android/nightly .mozconfig; else echo Downloading mozconfig; wget -O .mozconfig http://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/raw-file/production/mozilla2/android/mozilla-central/nightly/mozconfig; fi'], 1260, None, None, False, True), kwargs: {}, attempt #1
To clarify, what exactly is missing for this bug to be fixed?
The Release Engineering team needs to add this build configuration to our buildbot configs to get these builds running in our automation. Unfortunately they also have a lot of other high-priority tasks, so it just hasn't happened yet. You can see that Armen has made some progress in comment 17.
IMHO from end-user viewpoint : - have Android phone/tablet based on ARMv6 - go to market, search "firefox" - found mozilla Firefox browser - select install and accept permission requirements. ARMv6 build automatically selected for download, based on my phone config, then downloaded and installed.
We appreciate the interest, but none of this discussion is relevant to this bug or will help it get fixed. If you'd like to discuss this, please do so in the newsgroups.
I have tried to build it again: http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=MozillaTest/1338567051.1338569482.28064.gz&fulltext=1 It failed 39 minutes into the compilation: res/drawable/address_bar_url_default.xml:0: error: Resource entry address_bar_url_default is already defined. res/drawable/address_bar_url_default.9.png:0: Originally defined here. res/drawable/address_bar_url_pressed.xml:0: error: Resource entry address_bar_url_pressed is already defined. res/drawable/address_bar_url_pressed.9.png:0: Originally defined here. make[6]: *** [R.java] Error 1 make[6]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... Note: Some input files use or override a deprecated API. Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details. Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe operations. Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details. res/drawable/address_bar_url_default.xml:0: error: Resource entry address_bar_url_default is already defined. res/drawable/address_bar_url_default.9.png:0: Originally defined here. res/drawable/address_bar_url_pressed.xml:0: error: Resource entry address_bar_url_pressed is already defined. res/drawable/address_bar_url_pressed.9.png:0: Originally defined here. make[6]: *** [gecko.ap_] Error 1 make[6]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox/mobile/android/base' make[5]: *** [libs] Error 2 make[5]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox/mobile/android' make[4]: *** [libs_tier_app] Error 2 make[4]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[3]: *** [tier_app] Error 2 make[3]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[2]: *** [default] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[1]: *** [realbuild] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build' make: *** [build] Error 2 program finished with exit code 2 elapsedTime=2378.839056
Assignee: nobody → armenzg
Was this an incremental build? This sort of thing is usually fixed by doing rm -rf <obdjir>/mobile/android/base and rebuilding
Clobbering and trying again.
Please ignore that it is orange (releng staging stuff). Consider it as green. Here is the log: http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=MozillaTest/1338827272.1338830003.9738.gz&fulltext=1 Here is the build: http://people.mozilla.com/~armenzg/android/armv6/fennec-15.0a1.en-US.android-arm.apk Can anyone please give it a shot?
This build works for me on an armv6 phone. Thanks! I think we'll have to sort out the package naming, though, since it just comes out as "android-arm".
Depends on: 761454
Attached patch [wip] add android-armv6 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Unassigning until bug 761454 gets resolved.
Assignee: armenzg → nobody
Whiteboard: [mobile][armv6] → [mobile][armv6][waiting on dep bug]
(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #26) > Please ignore that it is orange (releng staging stuff). Consider it as green. > > Here is the log: > http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=MozillaTest/1338827272. > 1338830003.9738.gz&fulltext=1 > > Here is the build: > http://people.mozilla.com/~armenzg/android/armv6/fennec-15.0a1.en-US.android- > arm.apk > > Can anyone please give it a shot? I install its on my phone (Samsung S5570i Galaxy Pop Plus, Android 2.3.6). The browser not connect to internet and when I enter to Sync screen then browser stuck until I back to previus screen.
Armen: the package naming issue should be fixed, I think this is ready to go now.
Triggering on staging.
Whiteboard: [mobile][armv6][waiting on dep bug] → [mobile][armv6]
The packaging for the tests looks a little funny: fennec-16.0a1.en-US.android-arm-armv6-armv6-armv6.tests.zip which I somehow don't see "make upload" uploading. The binaries got uploaded to here: http://people.mozilla.com/~armenzg/android/armv6.take2 Maybe it is something on my releng steps? http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=MozillaTest/1340210699.1340211017.7046.gz&fulltext=1
Assignee: nobody → armenzg
Priority: P3 → P2
Depends on: 766664
Priority: P2 → P3
Armen: thanks for that! I fixed bug 766664, so the test package name should be fixed now. Can you spin another build on staging? Otherwise things look good.
Hi ted, I am getting this now: http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=MozillaTest/1340284823.1340286901.1894.gz&fulltext=1 /builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox/_virtualenv/bin/python /builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/config/Preprocessor.py \ -DOBJDIR="`pwd`" -DMANGLED_ANDROID_PACKAGE_NAME=org.mozilla.f3nn3c -DANDROID_PACKAGE_NAME=org.mozilla.fennec -DMOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME="Nightly" -DMOZ_APP_NAME=fennec -DMOZ_APP_VERSION=16.0a1 -DMOZ_CHILD_PROCESS_NAME=lib/libplugin-container.so -DMOZ_MIN_CPU_VERSION=5 -DMOZ_CRASHREPORTER=1 -DANDROID_VERSION_CODE=2012062106 -DMOZILLA_OFFICIAL=1 -DUA_BUILDID=20120621 -DMOZ_ANDROID_SHARED_ID="org.mozilla.fennec.sharedID" -DANDROID=1 -DANDROID_VERSION=5 -DCROSS_COMPILE=1 -DHAVE_ARM_SIMD=1 -DHAVE_ARM_NEON=1 -DMOZ_ENABLE_PROFILER_SPS=1 -DMOZILLA_VERSION=\"16.0a1\" -DMOZILLA_VERSION_U=16.0a1 -DMOZILLA_UAVERSION=\"16.0\" -DNO_PW_GECOS=1 -DMOZ_LINKER=1 -DD_INO=d_ino -DSTDC_HEADERS=1 -DHAVE_SSIZE_T=1 -DHAVE_ST_BLKSIZE=1 -DHAVE_SIGINFO_T=1 -DHAVE_UINT=1 -DHAVE_UINT_T=1 -DHAVE_UNAME_DOMAINNAME_FIELD=1 -DHAVE_VISIBILITY_HIDDEN_ATTRIBUTE=1 -DHAVE_VISIBILITY_ATTRIBUTE=1 -DHAVE_DIRENT_H=1 -DHAVE_GETOPT_H=1 -DHAVE_MEMORY_H=1 -DHAVE_UNISTD_H=1 -DHAVE_MALLOC_H=1 -DHAVE_SYS_STATFS_H=1 -DHAVE_SYS_SYSMACROS_H=1 -DHAVE_LINUX_QUOTA_H=1 -DHAVE_MMINTRIN_H=1 -DHAVE_SYS_CDEFS_H=1 -DHAVE_DLOPEN=1 -DHAVE_MEMMEM=1 -DNO_X11=1 -DHAVE_STRERROR=1 -DHAVE_LCHOWN=1 -DHAVE_FCHMOD=1 -DHAVE_SNPRINTF=1 -DHAVE_MEMMOVE=1 -DHAVE_RINT=1 -DHAVE_SETBUF=1 -DHAVE_ISATTY=1 -DHAVE_FLOCKFILE=1 -DHAVE_LOCALTIME_R=1 -DHAVE_STRTOK_R=1 -DHAVE_CLOCK_MONOTONIC=1 -DMALLOC_H=\<malloc.h\> -DHAVE_STRNDUP=1 -DHAVE_MEMALIGN=1 -DHAVE_VALLOC=1 -DHAVE_I18N_LC_MESSAGES=1 -DNS_ALWAYS_INLINE=__attribute__\(\(always_inline\)\) -DNS_ATTR_MALLOC=__attribute__\(\(malloc\)\) -DNS_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT=__attribute__\(\(warn_unused_result\)\) -DMOZ_BUILD_APP=mobile/android -DMOZ_WIDGET_ANDROID=1 -DMOZ_PDF_PRINTING=1 -DMOZ_INSTRUMENT_EVENT_LOOP=1 -DUSE_ARM_KUSER=1 -DMOZ_DISTRIBUTION_ID=\"org.mozilla\" -DMOZ_ANDROID_HISTORY=1 -DMOZ_JAVA_COMPOSITOR=1 -DIBMBIDI=1 -DACCESSIBILITY=1 -DNS_PRINTING=1 -DNS_PRINT_PREVIEW=1 -DMOZ_RAW=1 -DMOZ_OGG=1 -DATTRIBUTE_ALIGNED_MAX=64 -DMOZ_MEDIA_NAVIGATOR=1 -DMOZ_WEBM=1 -DVPX_ARM_ASM=1 -DMOZ_WAVE=1 -DMOZ_SYDNEYAUDIO=1 -DMOZ_SPEEX_RESAMPLER=1 -DMOZ_MEDIA=1 -DMOZ_TREMOR=1 -DMOZ_OPUS=1 -DMOZ_XTF=1 -DENABLE_SYSTEM_EXTENSION_DIRS=1 -DMOZ_CRASHREPORTER=1 -DMOZ_CRASHREPORTER_ENABLE_PERCENT=100 -DLIBJPEG_TURBO_ARM_ASM=1 -DMOZ_USE_NATIVE_POPUP_WINDOWS=1 -DMOZ_TREE_FREETYPE=1 -DHAVE_FT_BITMAP_SIZE_Y_PPEM=1 -DHAVE_FT_GLYPHSLOT_EMBOLDEN=1 -DHAVE_FT_LOAD_SFNT_TABLE=1 -DMOZ_UPDATER=1 -DMOZ_UPDATE_CHANNEL=default -DMOZ_DISABLE_DOMCRYPTO=1 -DMOZ_FEEDS=1 -DMOZ_GFX_OPTIMIZE_MOBILE=1 -DMOZ_DEBUG_SYMBOLS=1 -DMOZ_LOGGING=1 -DSIZEOF_INT_P=4 -DMOZ_MEMORY_SIZEOF_PTR_2POW=2 -DMOZ_MEMORY=1 -DMOZ_MEMORY_LINUX=1 -DMOZ_MEMORY_ANDROID=1 -DJSGC_INCREMENTAL=1 -DHAVE__UNWIND_BACKTRACE=1 -DJS_DEFAULT_JITREPORT_GRANULARITY=3 -DMOZ_OMNIJAR=1 -DMOZ_USER_DIR=\".mozilla\" -DMOZ_STATIC_JS=1 -DMOZ_TREE_PIXMAN=1 -DHAVE_STDINT_H=1 -DHAVE_INTTYPES_H=1 -DMOZ_TREE_CAIRO=1 -DHAVE_UINT64_T=1 -DMOZ_GRAPHITE=1 -DMOZ_ENABLE_SKIA=1 -DMOZ_XUL=1 -DMOZ_PROFILELOCKING=1 -DBUILD_CTYPES=1 -DMOZ_PLACES=1 -DMOZ_APP_COMPONENT_INCLUDE=\"nsBrowserComponents.h\" -DMOZ_MACBUNDLE_ID=org.mozilla.nightly -DMOZ_APP_UA_NAME=\"Firefox\" -DMOZ_APP_UA_VERSION=\"16.0a1\" -DMOZ_UA_FIREFOX_VERSION=\"16.0a1\" -DFIREFOX_VERSION=16.0a1 -DMOZ_TELEMETRY_REPORTING=1 -DMOZ_DLL_SUFFIX=\".so\" -DXP_UNIX=1 -DUNIX_ASYNC_DNS=1 /builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/mobile/android/base/AndroidManifest.xml.in > AndroidManifest.xml /tools/android-sdk-r15/platforms/android-14/../../platform-tools/aapt package -f -M AndroidManifest.xml -I /tools/android-sdk-r15/platforms/android-14/android.jar -S res -J . --custom-package org.mozilla.gecko /tools/android-sdk-r15/platforms/android-14/../../platform-tools/aapt: /usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version information available (required by /tools/android-sdk-r15/platforms/android-14/../../platform-tools/aapt) res/layout/reader_popup.xml:27: error: Error: No resource found that matches the given name (at 'text' with value '@string/add_to_reading_list'). make[6]: *** [R.java] Error 1 make[6]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox/mobile/android/base' make[5]: *** [libs] Error 2 make[5]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox/mobile/android' make[4]: *** [libs_tier_app] Error 2 make[3]: *** [tier_app] Error 2 make[4]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[3]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[2]: *** [default] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build/obj-firefox' make[1]: *** [realbuild] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builds/slave/m-cen-andrd-armv6/build' make: *** [build] Error 2
Priority: P3 → P2
Did the required SDK level change again?
(In reply to Mike Hommey [:glandium] from comment #36) > Did the required SDK level change again? Apparently not.
I'd suggest doing "make -C mobile/android/base clean" - those resource files are really finicky and often need to be cleaned to work properly.
Clobbering worked! I have a question that I have not yet figured out. What update platform should we have? For native we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3 For Xul we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-xul.
We will have to change the update platform once we get an answer.
Attachment #632258 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #635339 - Flags: review?(coop)
Attachment #635340 - Flags: review?(jhopkins)
Attachment #635339 - Flags: review?(coop) → review?(jhopkins)
Attachment #635340 - Flags: review?(jhopkins) → review+
Comment on attachment 635339 [details] [diff] [review] add android-armv6 Looks reasonable to me, except you may want to set android_signing=True.
Attachment #635339 - Flags: review?(jhopkins) → review+
(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #39) > Clobbering worked! > > I have a question that I have not yet figured out. > > What update platform should we have? > For native we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3 > For Xul we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-xul. I don't have a strong opinion tbh, but I would suggest Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3
Attachment #635339 - Attachment description: [wip] add android-armv6 → add android-armv6
Attachment #635339 - Flags: checked-in+
Attachment #635340 - Flags: checked-in+
Merged to production today
We are live now! NOTE: Unless you are a developer I suggest you to wait until tomorrow or early next week. By then we should be able to confirm that we actually have automated updates for armv6 builds. I know you're all eager but just wait a little longer :) Builds are on ftp and reporting is in here: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?jobname=armv6 https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Mozilla-Inbound&jobname=armv6 Can you please verify that we're good?
(In reply to Brad Lassey [:blassey] from comment #43) > > What update platform should we have? > > For native we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3 > > For Xul we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-xul. > > I don't have a strong opinion tbh, but I would suggest > Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3 I agree, lets use "Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3"
http://armenzg.blogspot.ca/2012/06/initial-automated-armv6-builds-for.html We can do another post when we actually have the nightly builds verified to be working.
Attachment #635428 - Flags: review?(jhopkins)
padenot noticed that the new armv6 build is failing to upload symbols to symbols1.dmz.phx1.mozilla.com, which it shouldn't be attempting on the try branch.
Attachment #635500 - Flags: review?(armenzg)
(In reply to Mark Finkle (:mfinkle) from comment #47) > (In reply to Brad Lassey [:blassey] from comment #43) > > > > What update platform should we have? > > > For native we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3 > > > For Xul we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-xul. > > > > I don't have a strong opinion tbh, but I would suggest > > Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3 > > I agree, lets use "Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3" Armen's asking from the point of view of what we use in the buildbot configs to publish the update snippets to the right place. The builds need to be querying with that too, and right now the v6 and non0v6 are the same %BUILD_TARGET%. Here's what a local Apache sees if I point a v6 dep build at it GET /update/4/Fennec/16.0a1/20120621135913/Android_arm-eabi-gcc3/en-US/default/Linux%202.6.36.3/default/default/16.0a1/update.xml?force=1 and here's non-v6 nightly GET /update/4/Fennec/16.0a1/20120621053048/Android_arm-eabi-gcc3/en-US/nightly/Linux%202.6.36.3/default/default/16.0a1/update.xml?force=1 HTTP/1.1 So we'll be updating v6 builds to non-v6 ones.
Attachment #635428 - Flags: review?(jhopkins) → review+
Attachment #635500 - Flags: review?(armenzg) → review?(bear)
This will turn off v6 nightlies until the requests can be sorted out. The dep builds don't update properly regardless of build type (they're on the default channel).
Attachment #635597 - Flags: review?(bear)
Attachment #635500 - Flags: review?(bear) → review+
Attachment #635597 - Flags: review?(bear) → review+
Comment on attachment 635597 [details] [diff] [review] Disable nightlies Also disabled the xulrunner nightly job on landing: http://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/eb8d772a00a3 Armen, when you turn nightlies back on you should define MOZ_SYMBOLS_EXTRA_BUILDID in the env for android-armv6. Without that the symbol manifests for v6 and non-v7 nightlies will overwrite each other, which shortens the history we keep to 15 builds and leaves orphans in the symbolstore.
Attachment #635597 - Flags: checked-in+
There is an extra line for something that I always change for staging. Might as well land it.
Attachment #635865 - Flags: review?(nrthomas)
(In reply to Nick Thomas [:nthomas] from comment #51) > (In reply to Mark Finkle (:mfinkle) from comment #47) > > (In reply to Brad Lassey [:blassey] from comment #43) > > > > > > What update platform should we have? > > > > For native we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3 > > > > For Xul we have Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-xul. > > > > > > I don't have a strong opinion tbh, but I would suggest > > > Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3 > > > > I agree, lets use "Android_armv6-eabi-gcc3" > > Armen's asking from the point of view of what we use in the buildbot configs > to publish the update snippets to the right place. The builds need to be > querying with that too, and right now the v6 and non0v6 are the same > %BUILD_TARGET%. Here's what a local Apache sees if I point a v6 dep build at > it > GET > /update/4/Fennec/16.0a1/20120621135913/Android_arm-eabi-gcc3/en-US/default/ > Linux%202.6.36.3/default/default/16.0a1/update.xml?force=1 > and here's non-v6 nightly > GET > /update/4/Fennec/16.0a1/20120621053048/Android_arm-eabi-gcc3/en-US/nightly/ > Linux%202.6.36.3/default/default/16.0a1/update.xml?force=1 HTTP/1.1 > > So we'll be updating v6 builds to non-v6 ones. nthomas, what do we have to fix in here? I already set the update_platform to the value requested. I am triggering nightly builds on dev-master for now.
Bug 767864 to fix the armv6 build so that we can tell it apart from the v7 ones.
Depends on: 767864
Depends on: 768386
Comment on attachment 635865 [details] [diff] [review] modify MOZ_SYMBOLS_EXTRA_BUILDID for armv6 Apologies for the delay. >diff --git a/mozilla/config.py b/mozilla/config.py >+ BRANCHES[branch]['platforms']['android-armv6']['env']['MOZ_SYMBOLS_EXTRA_BUILDID'] = 'android-armv6-%s' % branch Please also add this to the '######## generic branch configs' block which is also in config.py. >-BRANCHES['try']['pgo_strategy'] = 'try' >+BRANCHES['try']['pgo_strategy'] = None Is this a stray hunk of code ?
Attachment #635865 - Flags: review?(nrthomas) → review-
Attachment #635865 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #638816 - Flags: review?(nrthomas)
Attached patch enable nightly builds (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Waiting on dependent bug before landing.
Attachment #638881 - Flags: review?(nrthomas)
Comment on attachment 638881 [details] [diff] [review] enable nightly builds Presumably this is for after the BUILD_TARGET changes in bug 767864 and we verify that's working, in which case update_platform will need changing. Looks like it's going to be 'Android_arm-eabi-gcc3-armv6'.
Attachment #638881 - Flags: review?(nrthomas) → review-
Comment on attachment 638816 [details] [diff] [review] modify MOZ_SYMBOLS_EXTRA_BUILDID for armv6 (take2) You're having a bad run here. This patch doesn't work because m-c, m-a, m-b, m-r are never in ACTIVE_PROJECT_BRANCHES, so you need the block for them in the first place you had it. To catch things that are in ACTIVE_PROJECT_BRANCHES you need this + if BRANCHES[branch]['platforms'].has_key('android-armv6'): + BRANCHES[branch]['platforms']['android-armv6']['env']['MOZ_SYMBOLS_EXTRA_BUILDID'] = 'android-armv6-' + branch
Attachment #638816 - Flags: review?(nrthomas) → review-
* enable nightlies with fixed update_platform, enable snippet generation * fix up symbol naming Eyeballs OK when dumping the master config & builders.
Attachment #638816 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #638881 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #639044 - Flags: review?(nrthomas)
Comment on attachment 639044 [details] [diff] [review] Round up of fixes Don't think I should review my own patch, even if it's combining other ones. Over to Rail.
Attachment #639044 - Flags: review?(nrthomas) → review?(rail)
Comment on attachment 639044 [details] [diff] [review] Round up of fixes Review of attachment 639044 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- A nit. ::: mozilla/config.py @@ +788,5 @@ > 'upload_symbols': True, > 'packageTests': True, > 'enable_codesighs': False, > 'enable_xulrunner': False, > + 'create_partial': False, You may drop this, since it False by default.
Attachment #639044 - Flags: review?(rail) → review+
Live in production. I triggered a nightly build.
>I triggered a nightly build. This is great news! However I guess the road is still long before an official release can be made?
Can I please get some verification? http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mobile/nightly/2012/07/2012-07-06-07-44-39-mozilla-central-android-armv6/fennec-16.0a1.en-US.android-arm-armv6.apk http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mobile/nightly/latest-mozilla-central-android-armv6 I can trigger a second nightly to verify that we get updated. (In reply to Joel Schaerer from comment #70) > >I triggered a nightly build. > > This is great news! However I guess the road is still long before an > official release can be made? It will take a while. Once you hear we're "on beta" we will be much closer and there would probably be a clear path forward.
(In reply to Joel Schaerer from comment #70) > >I triggered a nightly build. > > This is great news! However I guess the road is still long before an > official release can be made? Hopefully not too long, but there is not a schedule yet.
Attachment #640775 - Flags: review?(nrthomas)
Attachment #640775 - Flags: review?(nrthomas) → review+
Are localized builds planned?
(In reply to Please Ignore This Troll from comment #74) > Are localized builds planned? They will come eventually. Once we start working I hope to remember to paste the bug in here.
I don't know why I forgot to close it.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
so basically we can get firefox from the google play store via our armv6 phones now ???
For now you can only get them through FTP: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mobile/nightly/latest-mozilla-central-android-armv6 Sometime this year we will have them on the Play Store as well. You can subscribe to bug 775232 to when we start generating them for "Firefox Beta". On that bug we will be doing the work for it. The first beta of Firefox 16 will happen in 4 weeks from now. We hope to have the first armv6 beta around that time. That is the plan for now. If everything is go to well we could see them as "Firefox" (rather than just beta) in 10 weeks from now (each cycle is 6 weeks long). I hope this info helps.
Will there be one that works for the Pandigital Novel (2012 Walmart WPDN) R7T40WWHF1? It's running Eclair 2.1. I keep waiting for a mod to get it to at least Froyo but I doubt it's going to happen since it hasn't been on the market that long. I would be happy to allow my Novel to be a test dummy if someone were interested. It's ARMv6 and I'd be happy to give any further info if someone would be interested in picking this up. Chrome certainly isn't showing us 'Android on the cheap' people any love.
(In reply to Joseph R. Pruitt from comment #79) > Will there be one that works for the Pandigital Novel (2012 Walmart WPDN) > R7T40WWHF1? It's running Eclair 2.1. I keep waiting for a mod to get it to > at least Froyo but I doubt it's going to happen since it hasn't been on the > market that long. Eclair (Android 2.1) is out of our minimum OS requirement range. We need support for features not found in Eclair. Android 2.2 (Froyo) is our current minimum OS version.
Ok that will work. I do thank you for the rapid response, Mark.
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
Depends on: 923210
Component: Platform Support → Buildduty
Product: Release Engineering → Infrastructure & Operations
Product: Infrastructure & Operations → Infrastructure & Operations Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: