<@ulm> meeting time <@ulm> !proj council (council@gentoo.org) arthurzam, dilfridge, mgorny, robbat2, sam, soap, ulm * @arthurzam here <@robbat2> present <@ulm> 1. roll call <@sam_> hey, he didn't start rollcall ;) <@arthurzam> sorry * @sam_ here * @arthurzam here * @mgorny here [21:01] * @robbat2 present * @ulm here <@ulm> dilfridge and soap are missing * @soap here <@arthurzam> ulm: dilfridge wrote in #-private [21:02] <@ulm> yes, I've seen it <@ulm> so shall we just continue? <@ulm> agenda is here: https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/uldnrnla2@gentoo.org/ <@ulm> 2. Status of SPARC (32 bit) and HP/PA [21:03] <@ulm> https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/26437636.EfDdHjke4D@pinacolada/ <@ulm> which is dilfridge's item <@arthurzam> But I think sam_ and me can project it [21:04] <@sam_> i'm fine with us destabling both, but i don't want us to remove either, we're often the last distro to support an arch and it both brings in niche users and also is handy for development <@sam_> what we really need is catalyst to support cross building <@sam_> which would be much more efficient too <@arthurzam> Looking at https://gentoo.akhuettel.de/bugs/arches.php, sparc + hppa are issues <@mgorny> didn't we restore stable there recently, though? <@arthurzam> That massive drop in both of them looks suspicious to my eyes [21:05] <@sam_> mgorny: Idon't think so? <@sam_> I mean drop stable keywords <@arthurzam> mgorny: I think you mistake it with mips & alpha <@mgorny> maybe * @mgorny leaves it to you <@mgorny> it's not like i'm doing anything about them <@arthurzam> sam_: maybe the only thing with destable is to mark some toolchains which are still only ~arch as masked on those arches [21:06] <@sam_> good idea <@arthurzam> just so we show equivalent "stable" level toolchain <@arthurzam> I'm really sad with both, but I think it is time we see the current status <@sam_> yeah <@arthurzam> But I'm not sure it helps dilfridge's issue with stage3 [21:07] <@soap> arthurzam: so you're saying a stable profile without stable keywords> <@soap> ? <@arthurzam> soap: yes <@soap> yes, fine too <@arthurzam> consistent tree, only ~hppa or ~sparc <@sam_> arthurzam: I think we should either see what goes wrong with qemu or see how bad it would be to make catalyst do cross <@robbat2> to be clear for the discussion; this is all of sparc; not just the sparc 32ul <@soap> apparently some people dont like that <@sam_> but i think qemu improved a fair bit for hppa at least <@arthurzam> robbat2: yes <@robbat2> the sparc hardware is much newer than hppa [21:08] <@robbat2> but it's incredible power-hungry <@arthurzam> robbat2: catbus's power consumption is so big, it will be always an issue for OUSOUL or any volunteer for hosting <@robbat2> yes idles at 1.2kW <@mgorny> aren't there more power efficient sparc machines? i suppose they didn't do 1.2 kW laptops xP <@arthurzam> If not mistaken, it has higher consumption than our 2 beefy new amd64 monsters <@mgorny> though i suppose these might be slow beyond usefulness [21:09] <@robbat2> a detail about that consumption: Solaris kernel has proper power saving, but linux doesn't <@sam_> robbat2: one option, other than trying to forward-port the power management patches (they exist for linux but for an old version), would be to run Solaris on the host and use an ldom for linux <@robbat2> either way; it's still a big power draw when we run builds on it <@sam_> that is what debian does <@robbat2> even if we did have the patches or solaris; we get full draw during builds & tinderbox [21:10] <@robbat2> *full power draw <@arthurzam> OK, so first action item - ~arch both arches <@arthurzam> Second item: search for qemu stage3 build <@sam_> robbat2: not necessarily, they wouldn't have to be built at full -jN, and we don't know how the scaling works <@robbat2> related to this: in the foundation AGM; I proposed the alt-arch systems should move away from OSL; to unspecified new home [21:11] <@robbat2> including considering paying devs to host them <@sam_> arthurzam: both sound good to me <@robbat2> starting with ~arch seems good to that <@robbat2> however for hppa; I think we might go further in future because that hardware is broken [21:12] <@mgorny> we probably need proper maintainers for it <@mgorny> i.e. not only people to host them, but also to fix them if necessary <@arthurzam> Currently sam_ was the last defender of hppa from official devs <@sam_> i have a hppa machine, i just can't afford to run it all the time <@sam_> and electricity is expensive here [21:13] <@sam_> i think it's too much even to request funding for <@arthurzam> sam_: don't you want funcding for building some nuclear reactors? * @arthurzam hides <@sam_> :D <@mgorny> just hilack the local LLM data center [21:14] <@soap> arthurzam: we'll hide it in a bunch of mountains, it'll be fine <@arthurzam> mgorny: I think at this point LLM is more useful than hppa - remember the random corruption when muta got to 100% CPU load? <@robbat2> it was just hallicinating to be an LLM [21:15] <@ulm> so, do we have to vote on this? <@soap> IIRC sam's HPPA doesnt have the corruption issues? <@ulm> if yes, someone please come up with a motion <@arthurzam> ulm: I think my 2 action items above summaries this discussion <@ulm> <@arthurzam> OK, so first action item - ~arch both arches <@ulm> <@arthurzam> Second item: search for qemu stage3 build <@ulm> thes ones? [21:16] <@ulm> *these <@arthurzam> yes <@mgorny> i don't think the second one needs a council vote <@ulm> I agree <@arthurzam> yeah, just make it a one motion <@ulm> motion: demote hppa and sparc from stable to testing * @robbat2 aye * @arthurzam yes [21:17] * @ulm yes * @sam_ yes * @soap yes <@arthurzam> (outside council: sam_, we should make it into news item and PR item, so we remind community Gentoo exists) <@ulm> mgorny? * @mgorny yes [21:18] <@mgorny> sorry <@ulm> 6 yes votes (of 6 council members present) <@ulm> unanimous <@ulm> anything else for this item? <@sam_> arthurzam: yeah <@sam_> nothing more from me <@ulm> 3. Open bugs with Council participation [21:19] <@ulm> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council#Open_bugs_with_Council_participation <@ulm> bug 730200 ulm: https://bugs.gentoo.org/730200 "metadata/AUTHORS: inclusion of myself and prior employers that may own copyright"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; robbat2:council <@ulm> bug959157 ulm: https://bugs.gentoo.org/959157 "Request for listing "Eli Schwartz" in metadata/AUTHORS"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; eschwartz:council <@sam_> that one is waiting on ztrawhcse <@arthurzam> and on robbat2 [21:20] <@sam_> indeed <@ulm> I don't see further replies for these bugs, so moving on <@arthurzam> wait <+ztrawhcse> oh oops, I forgot to reply to that. I'll take care of it. <@arthurzam> Do we want to close with NEEDINFO and allow them to reopen? <@arthurzam> (since the wait cycle got long) [21:21] <@robbat2> meta question on these; using my earlier ones as an example; I have to nail down which commits I did during working hours <@robbat2> and I didn't reliably track it at the time <@robbat2> does the council intent to explicitly link those commits in future <@sam_> can you go off packages you know they used? <@robbat2> (with potential employers) <@sam_> that should be enough to pick a few <@ulm> would be nice to have at least one copyrightable commit associated with each AUTHORS entry [21:22] *** techtruth (techtruth@ip68-0-138-240.tc.ph.cox.net) has joined channel #gentoo-council *** techtruth (techtruth@ip68-0-138-240.tc.ph.cox.net) has quit: Changing host *** techtruth (techtruth@user/techtruth) has joined channel #gentoo-council <@robbat2> as long as we then document that it is not an exhaustive list <@ulm> and I'd say we can trace them in the bug <@sam_> it already isn't <@sam_> (and we do document that, I think) <@ulm> not in the AUTHORS file <@sam_> # It is opt-in and manually maintained, so it will be neither complete <@sam_> # nor necessarily up to date. <@robbat2> okay; at least one example for each [21:23] <@mgorny> are you asking me to choose *exactly one commit* to put there? xP <@mgorny> that's a hard choice <@ulm> mgorny: you're already in the file, IIRC? <@robbat2> that's why I said at least one [21:24] <@sam_> i don't think this needs to be in the meeting <@mgorny> just kidding <@sam_> it should be discussed in the bug and it's a meta topic anyway about your own request <@ulm> moving on <@ulm> bug 936211 https://bugs.gentoo.org/936211 "[Tracker] Gentoo Foundation dissolution"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; CONF; ulm:trustees <@arthurzam> Maybe we should create tracker for those bugs <@arthurzam> sorry, let's continue <@robbat2> interesting news piece re Foundation bank accounts [21:25] <@robbat2> this last week, while on a work trip; i happened to pass one of the few locations that Capital One operates <@robbat2> while i'm not a signatory; i managed to get some useful info re closing <@robbat2> we're going to need at least one signatory for each of the two seperate account setups; possibly a majority** [21:26] <@robbat2> the possibly part: i have a phone number that will need a signatory to phone to confirm how many we actually need *** techtruth (techtruth@user/techtruth) has quit: Ping timeout: 260 seconds <@robbat2> promethanfire is the only signature who is still a trustee <@robbat2> *signatory [21:27] <@arthurzam> thank you! <@ulm> how many signatories are there in total? <@robbat2> and the closing will have to be in person; at a full capitalone branch <@robbat2> not the capitalone Cafe locations <@robbat2> the legacy account (Netbank that became ING that became CapitalOne): exactly 1: david abbott <@ulm> and has to be signed in blood? :) <@robbat2> the new account: 3: antarus, dabbott, promethanfire <@mgorny> so either way we're going to need dabbott [21:28] <@ulm> probably it makes most sense to close all of them at the same time? [21:29] <@mgorny> robbat2: if we need a majority, do both need to do it together, or can each of them do it separately? <@robbat2> that's why I will need a signatory to call <@robbat2> CapitalOne branch locations... <@mgorny> or possibly sign a notary thingie for the other? <@robbat2> notary not accepted :_( <@robbat2> US states of: Lousisana, Maryland, New Jersey, Teaxs, New York, Virgina, Washington DC [21:30] <@robbat2> Florida not in the list <@ulm> and no west coast <@mgorny> are the accounts on Gentoo Foundation name? <@robbat2> so we need to plan to get dabbott to one of them; possibly Texas, where promethanfire yes <@robbat2> mgorny: yes <@mgorny> don't they close automatically when GF dissolves? [21:31] <@robbat2> no <@robbat2> larger order of operations: <@robbat2> approved motion of dissolution -> filing with New Mexico <@robbat2> and closing bank accounts must happen before the filing <@robbat2> but doesn't require the motion <@robbat2> filing is basically "we have no more assets or liabilities" [21:32] <@mgorny> ok, sucks <@robbat2> thats all on the update; i'm going to see if promethanfire can phone them this week for the last clarity <@mgorny> is there some kind of "suspended" state when GF no longer has to do taxes or anything while it's waiting for the final dissolution? [21:33] <@arthurzam> If there is no money, is there tax? <@robbat2> no; final tax filing is due with that new mexico filing <@robbat2> yes you have to file to say "we had no income" <@robbat2> terrible business tax laws <@robbat2> (in other cases, that filing might trigger grants to your business) [21:34] <@robbat2> any other questions re foundation dissolution ? <@mgorny> not from me [21:35] <@ulm> 4. Open floor [21:36] <@ulm> anything for open floor? <@mgorny> i'm slightly worried about the state of 32-bit arches in general <@mgorny> in dev-python/ a lot of stablereqs end up blocked because of neverending test regressions <@mgorny> perhaps time64 will improve things <@sam_> it should do I hope <@sam_> (especially as it fixes lfs too) [21:37] <@sam_> the FP issues will always be a problem even on 64-bit arches as the tests are usually dodgy <@mgorny> sam_: do you think we can switch arch testing to time64 soon? <@sam_> I think so <@arthurzam> Let's start with x86 <@sam_> dilfridge switched the website to include those stages recently too <@arthurzam> With my new tattoo installer it should be very simple to setup [21:38] <@arthurzam> https://gitlab.gentoo.org/arthurzam/tattoo/-/blob/master/systemd/installer-tester.sh <@ulm> anything else for open floor? [21:39] <@ulm> seems not to be the case [21:40] <@ulm> meeting closed <@ulm> thanks everyone! <@mgorny> thank you <@arthurzam> thank you *** ulm (~ulm@gentoo/developer/ulm) has set the topic for #gentoo-council: "265th meeting: 2025-09-14 19:00 UTC | https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20250914T19 | https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council | https://dev.gentoo.org/~dilfridge/decisions.pdf" <@sam_> thanks!