Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Steve McIntyre
Moritz wrote: >On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:17:23PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote: >> Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: >>> Also there are four updates for iceweasel, xulrunner, icedove >>> and iceape coming very soon, which take 12-15 hours each, while >>> the second slowest arch requires ca. 4-5 hours, imposin

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Martin Michlmayr
* Moritz Muehlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-08 23:30]: > toffee, the current security buildd is already a "Thecus N2100" (I > don't know if there are different models with varying speeds). There's only one model of the N2100. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:17:23PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote: > Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: >> Also there are four updates for iceweasel, xulrunner, icedove >> and iceape coming very soon, which take 12-15 hours each, while >> the second slowest arch requires ca. 4-5 hours, imposing another >> delay.

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:39:50PM +, Martin Guy wrote: > 2008/2/8, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 06:48:18PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > So, these Intel boards are _badly_ needed. Or maybe the buildd > > > can be run in qemu on a fast amd64 machin

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Bill Gatliff
Kevin Price wrote: Hi Martin, Martin Guy schrieb: If it's just a question of money I don't mind buying the security team an N2100, but mine is giving segfaults and bus errors on long builds so you might like to consider something different. Are you saying that in general N2100 might b

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Kevin Price
Hi Martin, Martin Guy schrieb: > If it's just a question of money I don't mind buying the security team > an N2100, but mine is giving segfaults and bus errors on long builds > so you might like to consider something different. Are you saying that in general N2100 might be unreliable? Kevin --

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Martin Guy
2008/2/8, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 06:48:18PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > So, these Intel boards are _badly_ needed. Or maybe the buildd > > can be run in qemu on a fast amd64 machine, I don't know if > > that would work out. > > It would probably be

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Bill Gatliff
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Also there are four updates for iceweasel, xulrunner, icedove and iceape coming very soon, which take 12-15 hours each, while the second slowest arch requires ca. 4-5 hours, imposing another delay. It takes that long on hedges.billgatliff.com? Wow! Are you saying

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 06:48:18PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > So, these Intel boards are _badly_ needed. Or maybe the buildd > can be run in qemu on a fast amd64 machine, I don't know if > that would work out. It would probably be slower than the existing buildd. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Cod

Re: Security buildd for armel

2008-02-08 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:05:29PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 11:01:01PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > I have a question wrt armel qualification for Lenny: > > What type of machine is planned to be used as the > > security buildd? > > Generally buildd's are handled