On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 06:53:46PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I strongly suggest that the box buildding security update use
> distcc+crosscc. This will speed things quite a bit with no
> risk of breakage since we are using a stable cross-compiler
> that is well tested.
> In my opinion, distcc+crosscc have more potential that aranym,
> especially for security in term of speed gain and reliability.
distcc+crosscc is my favorite as well. It's fast, it's cheap (in terms of
CPU overhead) and it's fairly extensible (adding more distcc hosts).
I think aranym is great for DDs and for installation tests, etc...
> I believe that if there had been a concerted attempt to use
> distcc+crosscc on some buildd, we would have been able to get
> released with Etch. Actually I still believe we can relase m68k
> as part of etch 4.0r2 or 4.0r3 if we show a real involvement
> even if merely symbolical.
Well, concerted attempt... what do we have and what do we need for some
m68k+distcc+crosscc? What needs to be changed within the buildd chroot?
I once installed a buildd-distcc chroot, but moved that out of the way
because diskspace was low on vivaldi (and my crosscc on the distcc host
didn't work)...
--
Ciao... // Fon: 0381-2744150
Ingo \X/ SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gpg pubkey: http://www.juergensmann.de/ij/public_key.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
