We should have new faster hardware on the cloud by Scaleway or Frya stack by 
July latest. 

Who I should contact to sponsor some of the capacities for Debian. 
Cheers 
> From: "Fabian Grünbichler"<[email protected]>
> Date:  2026年5月27日 (周三) 00:12
> Subject:  Re: regarding build speed on riscv64
> To: "Paul Gevers"<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Debian Release Team"<[email protected]>, 
> <[email protected]>
> (CCing debian-rust@)
> 
> On Tue, May 26, 2026, at 9:30 PM, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Hi riscv64 porters,
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > PS: I personally have the impression that rust is a particular problem 
> > on riscv64. While I recognize most things are slower on riscv64 
> > hardware, it seems that rust is extra slow. The ci.d.n team is 
> > considering to reject_list all rust packages on riscv64.
> 
> That has also been our experience in the Rust team - we started cutting down
> the worst offenders by skipping most tests on riscv64 (and I've considered
> doing that automatically for all packaged crates managed with debcargo..). But
> besides the bad performance, riscv64 has also been the architecture with the
> longest run of plain stability issues for Rust - i.e., random/flaky segfaults,
> aborts and similar problems affecting a wide range of crates/test suites. I
> don't have systematic data (and the few times I asked it was mostly described
> as hardware/kernel combination causing them), but it is probably not too hard
> to extract from debci logs.
> 
> In any case I am happy to test things on the toolchain side, or adjust he
> default list of arch restrictions in debcargo to always only run the all
> features case on riscv64, if that seems like a better hammer than disabling
> rust-* on debci outright. That being said, most crate tests there seem to just
> be good at flagging this riscv64 specific flakiness and bad performance, and
> not actual riscv64 specific issues in the packaging or sources, in my
> experience. If you do end up disabling rust-*, please take care to keep rustc
> itself tested if possible!
> 
> Fabian
> 

Reply via email to