On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 04:53:10PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:48:16AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> Hmmm, although I welcome the possibility of using aranym buildds, I'm more
> in favour of using real hardware whenever possible. ;)
> Christians buildds are offline for a long time now and I hope he can
> resurrect them soon.
Me too. That's three buildds offline, including an atari.
> Currently I have a 2.8 Pentium4 with 2 GB RAM doing nothing. But it's not a
> machine that's not supposed to be online 24/7.
buildds aren't very useful if they're not up 24/7.
Internet access is required for:
1) sid mirror - could work around with a local mirror, but that's a lot
of disk space
2) incoming - could skip building out of incoming, but causes dependency
headaches and give-backs if you're building off the top of the queue
3) w-b access - could manually queue packages, but it's a pain to
maintain
4) mail - easily batched
> But what's about the "removing packages"-idea like boost, flight simulators
> or other heavy weight apps rarely used on m68k?
I think we'll probably end up there, but so far all we have is hand
waving as opposed to something concrete and dependency chain based.
> I think getting aranym buildds up and running will be just an intermediate
> solution. There are more and more packages to be, steadily increasing in
> number, and it seems just a matter of time when all those aranym buildds
> won't be enough again to keep up.
Maybe, but historically we stay caught up pretty well until we have a
toolchain or other ugly dependency problem. We just haven't recovered
from the last one yet. (And massive binnmu's don't help, although a
handful of aranym buildds could probably handle those hits.)
> Maybe we can get a natively built and uptodate core Debian for m68k and a
> best-effort {stable}-m68k suite for other software (built by aranym
> buildds)? And yes, it's difficult to tell which package should end up in
> core or in {stable}-m68k...
Plus we move further away from stock debian. Not that I'm arguing, I
think we'll have to find a way to do it sooner or later. Perhaps we'll
point the direction for future debian changes. We've been talking about
it for years, meanwhile brute force would probably help. :)
Peace,
Stephen
--
Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
