Hi As everyone keeps claiming there is no armel buildd location redundancy, I don't have much motivation to keep ancina running. It's ignored anyway.
Cheers Luk On 05/19/2012 10:28 AM, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Thu, 17 May 2012, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 06:00:18AM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote: >>> On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 00:59 +0100, peter green wrote: >>>> The statement that all but one armel buildd is at the same location >>>> disagrees with >>>> the debian machines database. >>> [...] >>>> Metropolitan Area Network Darmstadt : arcadelt >>>> DG-i: argento >>> >>> They may still be physically located there, but: >>> >>> wanna-build=> select username, max(last_seen) as last_seen from >>> armel.users group by username having username like '%arcadelt' or >>> username like '%argento' order by 2; >>> username | last_seen >>> -----------------------+---------------------------- >>> buildd_armel-arcadelt | 2011-04-17 21:14:11.291825 >>> buildd_armel-argento | 2011-10-23 00:12:31.850723 >>> (2 rows) >>> >>> iirc they're only still hosted in case e.g. the ARM hosting falls over >>> for a prolonged period, but I'm happy to be corrected on that. >> >> AFAIK it's something like that, yes. Again, we're expecting to add >> more v7 machines to the cluster in York soon-ish to help with this. > > We (DSA) have been told by the buildd people to kill argento and > arcadelt. We just haven't gotten around to doing it yet. So > effectively armel does not have buildd location redundancy. > > > cf. RT#3490, RT#3694, RT#3699. > > Cheers, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fb7605f.7040...@debian.org
