S-CORE & QNX

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-01-28 15:00 CET

Link to join the meeting is in #score-infrastructure slack channel

⚠️ Beware parallel edits of this discussion.

We’re planning a meeting with QNX on short notice (~24h). Apologies for the rush—please share any topics you’d like to discuss.

• How to update QNX Tarball with new features
  • Process for tarball update (contact person/update every 2 weeks/S-Core ticket)
  • Current request: Update & Extension needed for efficient image generation:
    • QNX® SDP 8.0.3 (or later) with following additional QNX SDP packages integrated:
    • QNX® SDP 8.0 Networking - io-sock Virtio Drivers
    • QNX® SDP 8.0 Virtualization Drivers (Block)
    • QNX® SDP 8.0 Virtualization Drivers (Startup)
    • Raspberry pi 5 BSP support
• Publishing QNX-based S-Core images on GitHub as part of the S-Core releases (do we have a problem with „High risk application“ definition)
• Do we need a technical user license in CI (currently running with private Anton’s license)

---

Meeting Minutes

Participants

@AlexanderLanin (ETAS)
A. Gryc (QNX)
C. Sinnot (QNX)
@dcalavrezo-qorix (Qorix)
@jgetas (ETAS)
J Hanam (QNX)
@antonkri (BMW)
@odra (RedHat)
@FScholPer (Mercedes Benz)
@evinoth1206 (ETAS)

Minutes

• QNX wants to provide a regulary updated tarball (first one within 1-2 weeks)
  How to update QNX Tarball with new features

  • Requested packages can be included
  • Cadence: no internal monthly release, so monthly tarball update would not make much sense
  • Contact on QNX side is J Hanam.
  • First tarball as-as, later potential optimizations as in next point

• Storing tarball / image in S-CORE for testing, delivery and demos
  Publishing QNX-based S-Core images on GitHub as part of the S-Core releases (do we have a problem with „High risk application“ definition)

  • QNX needs to clarify internally

• Future optimizations

  • QNX will support score to generate the tarball ourselves via QNX Everywhere
    • Potentially by providing the recipe to individuals
  • S-CORE demand is probably: one size fits all, for a reference build
  • Outside S-CORE individual parties have their own QNX contracts as required for customized builds

• BSPSs:

  • Pi5 and qemu are available from software center, either source or prebuild.

• Technical User:
  Do we need a technical user license in CI (currently running with private Anton’s license)

  • QNX needs to clarify internally. Maybe based on an eclipse email address? Any other ideas by score?

• Follow-Up meeting in ~2 weeks

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-02-11 15:00 CET

Participants

@AlexanderLanin (ETAS)
A. Gryc (QNX)
C. Sinnot (QNX)
@jgetas (ETAS)
J Hanam (QNX)
@antonkri (BMW)
@pawelrutkaq
@FScholPer (Mercedes Benz)

Minutes

• QNX can provide opt-in multi user non-commercial license for "high risk" development, in addition to the current QNX non-commercial everywhere license which does not allow development of "high risk" applications. To be signed by participating companies as they see it as a requirement. Basically the new license allows "high risk" development, without any guarantees.
  • Note: we are not lawyers. The actual license text applies.
  • A. Gryc (QNX) will follow up with next formal steps.
  • QNX needs to know the S-CORE legal entity name. @FScholPer will provide it to angryc@qnx.com
• Prebuild QNX image can be provided by S-CORE, but must include a very clear statement that a QNX license is required, e.g. the everywhere license or this new license type.
  • After the license above is established, we can align on a concrete solution e.g. README text.
  • Note: for now the tarball still cannot be stored in S-CORE and must be downloaded every time on demand.
    • A. Gryc (QNX) to follow up on public hosting possibilities of the tarball.
    • @AlexanderLanin to follow up on private hosting possibilities in S-CORE (accessible to all committers + CICD)
• tarball
  • QNX: new tarball almost ready
  • S-CORE feedback: new tarball has super slow download (30 minutes, 10.000% slower). QNX to follow up.
  • S-CORE feedback: current/old tarball download fails very very often. This script is used for download. QNX will follow up. Example failure. Used core to trigger the error. S-CORE contact i.e. @pawelrutkaq (reach via Slack)
• Do we need a technical user license in CI (currently running with private Anton’s license) --> @FScholPer will clarify with Eclipse Foundation.
• We'll try Slack chat for faster iterations: Initial subscription, and then direct link to the chat: #score-qnx

Follow-Up

Bi-Weekly Wednesday 15:00 CEST (UTC+1) - S-CORE & QNX Meeting

• iCal (Outlook import)
• Web View
• Google Calendar
• Direct Zoom Link: https://eclipse.zoom.us/j/85906130055?pwd=G44Cg6MSbtrL28ThxBI0VOFRay6aQe.1

[JohnAtQNX]

Howdy! I think we have worked through the two tarball-related points above:

• slow download caused by no regional cloud caching (solved, hopefully)
• CI fails to download tarball solved by CI config change

[pawelrutkaq]

slow is still as slow as it was ;(

[JohnAtQNX]

Pawel confirmed offline that it is quick for them now.

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-02-25 15:00 CET

Participants

@AlexanderLanin (ETAS)
A. Gryc (QNX)
C. Sinnot (QNX)
@jgetas (ETAS)
J Hanam (QNX)
@antonkri (BMW)
@FScholPer (Mercedes Benz)

Minutes

• Update: license is in legal discussion at QNX. Initial alignment with Eclipse done. BMW will be pilot user.
• Fixed: new tarball has normal download speed
• can timeout be increased in S-CORE to avoid rare timeout problems? Root cause not analyzed yet.
• Info: QNX is investigating mass market compliance, to avoid export restrictions, this will simplify hosting tars/images at score.
• use QNX Software Centre CLI for download individual tarball contents, instead of prebuild static tarball files? To be investigated, whether that is helpful or another indirection? (this is probably especially interesting if we can host a self pre-builded tarball at score)
  • An example package list:
    https://gitlab.com/qnx/custom-target-image-builds/repo/-/blob/release/CTI-8.0.3r2/targets/rpi4/qsc_install_packages.list
  • And the example use in a Makefile (but applicable to a CI environment too):
    https://gitlab.com/qnx/custom-target-image-builds/repo/-/blob/release/CTI-8.0.3r2/Makefile?ref_type=heads#L110
  • Support: John Hanam
• Update on technical user license in CI (currently running with private Anton’s license):
  • We need a user with a MyQNX account, with a proper email address that someone actually maintains.
  • Andy (QNX) will respond to Waynes email
• Note: the two March metings are cancelled; we concentrate on slack chat (Initial subscription, and then direct link to the chat: #score-qnx)

[AlexanderLanin]

Reminder: the two March metings are cancelled; we concentrate on slack chat (Initial subscription, and then direct link to the chat: #score-qnx). Next meeting 2026-04-08.

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-04-08 15:00 CEST

Participants

@AlexanderLanin (ETAS)
C. Sinnot (QNX)
@jgetas (ETAS)
@FScholPer (Mercedes Benz)
@dcalavrezo-qorix

Minutes

• Storage: eclipse can provide us storage which is only accessible to CI and committers. Requires feedback from QNX regarding: Can you provide more details on what exactly is expected? As far as I understand regardless of tarball download or tarball creation we need to store it non publicly. Or was that resolved by now? See full comment by Wayne: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/issues/7305
• QNX 8.0.3 SDP provided via tarball at https://www.qnx.com/download/feature.html?programid=87174 / https://www.qnx.com/download/download/87174/installation_qnx_803_260305.tar.xz. Score will discuss upgrade at https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434#discussioncomment-16387676

Open points, not discussed:

• technical user license in CI (currently running with private Anton’s license)
• use QNX Software Centre CLI for download individual tarball contents
• can timeout be increased in S-CORE to avoid rare timeout problems? Root cause not analyzed yet.
• QNX is investigating mass market compliance, to avoid export restrictions, this will simplify hosting tars/images at score.
• S-CORE specific license, and therefore storage of build artifacts (image)

[antonkri]

QNX 2026-04-22 15:00 CEST

Participants

@jgetas (ETAS)
@JohnAtQNX
Karumuri Hari (LGE)
@antonkri

Minutes

• Storing SDP tarball within score to avoid unstable qnx download site
  • Probably initial identification is a problem that leads sometimes to longer timeouts. We may need to increate the timeout.
  • For now the storing of the tarball at S-Core infrastructure is still not possible from the legal point of view. QNX is still looking into it.
  • Using CLI could solve the problem, as
    • this would have text file as a list of all packages, that are needed
    • CLI binary could be hosted on S-Core as it doesn't contain any QNX "Secrets".
    • Identification can be much faster, as we do not depend on the "WebServer Cookie" approach.
  • Usage of technical user license -> @JohnAtQNX will clarify.
• Exact requirements for publishing qnx images in score
  • @AlexanderLanin will need to follow-up with @JohnAtQNX per email.
• Why we cant download 8.0.3 tarball with the commercial license
  • @JohnAtQNX will ping the team and will answer in the slack channel
  • QNX 8.0.4 is available
    • Do we want to switch to 8.0.4, we assume, that yes
    • Do we want to build another tarball with 8.0.4 or may be we should go for a "proper solution" with CLI.

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-05-06 15:00 CEST

Participants

@AlexanderLanin
@jgetas
@FScholPer

Agenda

• Storing SDP tarball
• technical user license
• Exact requirements for publishing qnx images in score
• Why we cant download 8.0.3 tarball with the commercial license
• S-Core high risk license
• Using CLI tool instead of tarballs (stabler download, user facing decision on updates, not dependent on qnx tarballs)

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-05-20 15:00 CEST

Participants

@AlexanderLanin
John (partial)
Andy
@nradakovic
@FScholPer (partial)
@dcalavrezo-qorix (partial)

Agenda / Minutes

• QNX License Agreement for S-CORE to replace/extend the QNX Everywhere license for development of high risk applications: first version was sent to @antonkri for review by BMW legal team. If approved by BMW as an early adopter, QNX will offer it to all S-CORE developers.
  --> R: @antonkri

• Request: QNX 8.0.4 via tarball from QNX, as we cannot build and store it ourselves (see above) -> R: John

• Can we store the QNX SDP in S-CORE? Eclipse is wiling to support, but we need the exact requirements. Either downloaded or self-build with the CLI tool, but it would help to store that stuff locally. For obvious performance reasons, and also more importantly for bazel caching, as it would be invalidated every time.

  • Absolute minimum: access only to CI (therefore kind of the same as storing a secret to download the SDP on the fly) (1)
  • Better: store it with access to few users (e.g. 5)
  • Better: access by "qnx-committers" (aka score members with write access and a qnx account) (~30)
  • Better: access by committers (aka score members with write access) (~50)
  • Better: access by all registered score developers (~200)
  • --> R: Andy

• How about CI license-key in general? We are still using the one from Anton (BMW), which doesn’t seem quite right. This is currently being discussed between QNX and eclipse (Wayne & Christian). Andy will ping them again to get this resolved :-) --> R: Andy

• Does QNX offer any API to query whether a user has a QNX account? e.g. authorize someone else to query such data as in typical oauth scenarios. -> no

• How about a personalized SDP-build-server within score, which will pass through credentials to QNX CLI and respond with a "personal SDP download link"? -> score would need to request such a server. any other implementation ideas?

---

• What are the exact requirements for publishing qnx images? You mentioned “making clear that this is score and not qnx in a README”?!

[AlexanderLanin]

QNX 2026-06-03 15:00 CEST

Participants

@AlexanderLanin
Andy
@antonkri
John
@dcalavrezo-qorix
Sistlajr

Agenda / Minutes

• QNX is working on extending their license agreements to contain rules for consortiums, will cover e.g. sharing SDP and generated images within the consortium (non public) --> R: Andy (but on vacation)

-> within S-CORE we need to find a place where to store the SDP etc. Currently the only thing we have is github cache?!

• How is QNX used in S-CORE?
  Within CICD it's used via setup-qnx-sdp action

• QNX SDP 8.0.4 package, as shared in Chat: https://www.qnx.com/download/feature.html?programid=88447

[nradakovic]

QNX 2026-06-17 15:00 CEST

Participants

@AlexanderLanin
@dcalavrezo-qorix
@antonkri
Berugu Suresh
@nradakovic
Sri Ram Yedula

Open Topics

Request: response here/via mail/via slack

• QNX is working on extending their license agreements to contain rules for consortiums, will cover e.g. sharing SDP and generated images within the consortium (non public)
• Building SDP during Bazel build using qnxsoftwarecenter_clt:
  • Is it possible to override default location of license file?
  • In case of multiple license keys, who has priority, which key is selected?
  • Using patchset list to generate SDP --> is it possible that one user generate a list and another user generate a SDP from the patchset list?
• Options for building SDP:
  • Repository rule installs SDP directly
    → one go, label-addressable, poor cacheability
  • Normal rule builds SDP archive
    → cacheable, but requires second step to consume as repository
  • Prebuild/publish SDP archive
    → best Bazel-native user experience
  • Normal rule produces tree artifact
    → one go and cacheable, but contents are opaque to filegroup/glob

[AlexanderLanin]

Note by Dan:

for the licensing resolution - from own experiments -try playing with env variables

QNX_CONFIGURATION_EXCLUSIVE- > overrides QNX_CONFIGURATION - > LM_LICENSE_FILE

that way you can override the default location
but the clear behavior is not described

[AlexanderLanin]

Note: Meeting on July 1st is cancelled