Nethserver-cockpit is not installable

[markVnl]

nethserver-cockpit requires nethserver-subscription and the latter requires puppet-agent which is not availible for armhfp (and probably not for aarch64).

Moreover we do not have a subscription model for arm which is a community effort.

Also See:
https://community.nethserver.org/t/nethserver-on-raspberry-pi/2851/178
https://community.nethserver.org/t/release-candidate-iso-7-7-1908-rc1/13482/26

[DavidePrincipi]

Proposal:

• define an arch-dependant subpackage for nethserver-subscription, (say nethserver-subscription-inventory). The ARM implementation is just an empty RPM.
• on the UI side, "disable" the support activation by checking a file existence from nethserver-subscription-inventory

[markVnl]

to be honest this stands not very high on my prio list..

For me any solution will do;
lets ask @federicoballarini and @mrmarkuz too

[DavidePrincipi]

to be honest ...

😂 I'll take care of implementing it

[DavidePrincipi]

@markVnl if the package-split is good I can complete the implementation on the UI side. Please let me know!

[markVnl]

@markVnl if the package-split is good I can complete the implementation on the UI side. Please let me know!

Will do so.
Have a appointment right now, first thing tomorrow morning .

[DavidePrincipi]

https://community.nethserver.org/t/teaser-nethserver-cockpit-on-arm/13543

Ok, I proceed with the UI changes

[DavidePrincipi]

...after a brief analysis I think there could be no need to change the UI now because Nethesis servers do not provide aarch64 and armhfp mirrors.

curl 'https://mirrorlist.nethserver.com/?repo=base&arch=x86_64&nsversion=7.7.1908&usetier=no'
curl 'https://mirrorlist.nethserver.com/?repo=base&arch=armhfp&nsversion=7.7.1908&usetier=no'

I'll ask Alessio to write in the right places that Nethesis support is provided only for x86_64 ATM...

[DavidePrincipi]

New packages in nethserver-testing 7.7

[markVnl]

New packages in nethserver-testing 7.7

Do I understand correctly latest PR#26 should result in:

After an attempt to register a non_x86_64 system?

[DavidePrincipi]

Yes it is the expected output! However we could improve the messages to clarify it is not expected to work with non x86_64 arches /cc @alefattorini @gsanchietti