15 ms·
Rocky Linux 10 Will Support RISC-V
- rmrf100 1y agoLove Rocky!
- ElijahLynn 1y ago[flagged]
- audidude 1y agoRed Hat announced RISC-V yesterday with RHEL 10. So this seems rather expected. https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hat-partners-with-sifive-for-risc-v-developer-preview-for-red-hat-enterprise-linux-10 https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hat-partners-with-sifive-...
- mogwire 1y ago[flagged]
- teleforce 1y agoDebian Trixie now in hard frozen, also has official support for RISC-V64 [1]. [1] What's new in Debian 13: https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/whats-new.en.html#official-support-for-riscv64 https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/whats-n...
- mrbluecoat 1y agoBetter title: Rocky Linux 10 Will Support Two RISC-V Boards
- nine_k 1y agoEven to support one board, they'd need the whole build / testing infrastructure for RISC-V. Likely adding more boards is booing to be easy now, and any architecture-specific regressions, easier to spot and fix timely.
- nazunalika 1y agoFor sure, we needed a build infrastructure for RISC-V. I started out with five VisionFive 2's in my lab, and they're still doing work as needed. Granted, those are quite slow and painful because some builds will take a long, long time on those (for example, GCC took 7 days at the beginning, but we have it at about 5 days plus change now). Ever since we've added SiFive P550's to the mix, it has made it much faster for us to identify build issues and get them rectified. I still happen to use my VF2's for the "tiny" builds. It's true that since we've had a usable build root since last 2024, it gives our AltArch group the opportunity to build different kernels to support other SBC's or boards like they already do for ARM SBC's (rasperry pi for example, since that support isn't native to the EL kernel). So while we support the VF2's and QEMU out of the box, that group will handle the additional kernels for more hardware support. I'm actually looking forward to seeing what other boards the AltArch group will happen to add support for.
- rjsw 1y agoThey could easily support the Pine64 Star64 board as well, the VisionFive2 build of u-boot works on the Star64 too.
- nhanlon 1y agoYep, should work fine, just not stepping across the upstream (Fedora) support at the moment.
- NewJazz 1y agoFor a distro,just building packages for an architecture is notable support-wise. Those with custom firmware and kernels can pair them with the rocky 10 userspace.
- nhanlon 1y agoExactly! The AltArch SIG is exactly where those customization will come from, driven by community support.
- rob_c 1y agoEven better title: Rocky will take the RHEL work and rebrand and sell the boards at a discount from China and claim a win and that they're being attacked by IBM.
- felbane 1y agoMan some of y'all really have beef with Rocky...
- nhanlon 1y agoWe've actually been working with Fedora and RH on RISC-V for over a year now :)
- rob_c 1y agoStill, past sins and all that. Not too mention the model and the directions from those at the top. Great I always applaud contributions and I want to encourage it. But please see the damage done by some quite senior persons on the project and please distance yourselves from them.
- nhanlon 1y agoI suggest you try and measure yourself using that big stick you're holding up to other people. As one of the founders of the project, I don't think I'll distance myself from myself.
- carlwgeorge 1y ago
- arminiusreturns 1y agoI'm so looking forward to a RISC future!
- agarren 1y agoDitto! I haven’t found any hardware that’s daily-driver ready, but I keep looking. https://store.deepcomputing.io/products/dc-roma-ai-pc-risc-v-mainboard-ii-for-framework-laptop-13 https://store.deepcomputing.io/products/dc-roma-ai-pc-risc-v... I especially like the idea of getting a framework version in this case I want to swap in a different mainboard. By their own admission, the risc-v board is targeting developers and not ready for prime time. Also coming from the US, not sure how the tariff thing will workout…
- 0x000xca0xfe 1y agoRISC-V software ecosystem is really good already. It feels like everybody is just waiting for high performance CPU cores now. Sadly silicon cannot be built and released within seconds like software... Better to buy a SBC for now (I can recommend the OrangePi RV2 - it's fantastic!) and wait until actually desktop/laptop-class hardware is ready :)
- tucnak 1y agoOr best buy something like https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/precursor or some other FPGA-based platform to retain the programmable logic capability, you never know whether you're going to need it, and should you need it after all, it helps knowing it's there.
- rwmj 1y agoLove FPGAs, but they're not very practical if you need to run a non-toy Linux on RISC-V. They will typically top out at 100 MHz for the kind of FPGAs that you and I can afford to buy, and have other problems like limited RAM.
- gerdesj 1y agoI understand why people use RH and Rocky and even Oracle: the rpm wranglers. However its not for me. My earliest mainstream distro was RH when they did it just for fun (pre IBM) and then I slid slightly sideways towards Mandrake. I started off with Yggdrassil. I have to do jobs involving RH and co and its just a bit of a pain dealing with elderly stuff. Tomcat ... OK you can have one from 1863. There is a really good security back port effort but why on earth start off with a kernel that is using a walking stick. Perhaps I am being unkind but for me the RH efforts are (probably) very stable and a bit old. It's not the distro itself either. The users seem to have snags with updating it. I (very generally) find that RH shops are the worst at [redacted]
- dgfitz 1y agoI’d rather use redhat than Ubuntu. I was handed a machine the other week with Ubuntu 23.10 on it, OS supplied from a vendor with extensive customization. Apt was dead. Fuck that. At least RH doesn’t kill their repos.
- gerdesj 1y agoI've got Ubuntu 22.04 lying around that still update because they are LTS. Ubuntu has a well publicised policy for releases and you will have obviously read them. Try do-release-upgrade. You also mention "OS supplied from a vendor with extensive customization. Apt was dead." How on earth is that Ubuntu's problem?
- hshdhdhj4444 1y agoIsn’t Ubuntu basically killing apt? My Ubuntu became unusable because it kept insisting on installing a snap version of Firefox breaking a whole bunch of workflows. I do want to try a RH based OS (maybe Fedora) so they don’t keep changing things on me, but just where I am in life right now I don’t have the time/energy to do so, so for now I’m relying on my Mac. Hopefully I can try a new Linux distro in a few months, because I can’t figure it out yet, but something about macOS simply doesn’t work for me from a getting work done perspective.
- publicmail 1y agoMaybe a dumb question but how do non x86 boards normally boot Linux images in a generic way? When I was in the embedded space, our boards all relied on very specific device tree blobs. Is the same strategy used for these or does it use ACPI or something?
- beeflet 1y agoI think windows ARM laptops use UEFI?
- ChocolateGod 1y agoThey do, Windows Phone even use UEFI (not sure was completely compliant) back in the day.
- Arnavion 1y agopublicmail was asking about ACPI vs DT, not UEFI. Using UEFI and ACPI/DT are orthogonal; DT-using devices can also boot from UEFI if the firmware provides it. See https://github.com/TravMurav/dtbloader https://github.com/TravMurav/dtbloader for example.
- thebeardisred 1y agoThis is explicitly what we're doing in RHEL with the P550. We use u-boot and it's EFI capabilities to init grub (instead of another instance of u-boot)
- ChocolateGod 1y agoWhy not use systemd-boot?
- pantalaimon 1y agolooks like they still require a custom device tree to boot Linux
- Arnavion 1y ago
- pabs3 1y agoDebian too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44034528
- sylware 1y agoI cannot wait for those ultra-performant rv64 micro-architecture manufactured with the latest silicon process. One less toxic PI lock and much cleaner assembly.
- kwanbix 1y agoHow do they get access to the source code? I read some time ago that RH has changed how they provided the source code and that it was (almost) impossible to get it now?
- rwmj 1y agoI don't know where you heard that? The source code for Red Hat's RISC-V developer preview will be released alongside the binaries, on 1st June. However almost all of it is already in CentOS Stream 10 and you can browse it here: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream There are a few patched packages (and quite a large kernel patch), which is what we'll be releasing into a separate git repo when the developer preview is actually released.
- kwanbix 1y agoI mean in general, you can read it here for example: https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/10/oracle_ibm_rhel_code/#:~:text=Last%20month%2C%20Red%20Hat%20said,%2C%20EuroLinux%2C%20and%20Oracle%20Linux. https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/10/oracle_ibm_rhel_code/...
- rwmj 1y agoYeah I wouldn't believe what Oracle say, they're hardly a disinterested party here. You can go and grab the source for CS10 which is almost exactly RHEL 10 from the link I posted above, and RHEL 10 sources are distributed to our customers.
- nhanlon 1y agoWe've been building the RISC-V port from a combination of Fedora and CentOS Stream sources--the same as the core operating system--since early 2024. A lot of RISC-V support was already in F40 (which EL10 is cut from), so the rest was largely backporting and integrating into RHEL, which again, we've been tracking since CentOS Stream 10 was branched from Fedora last year.