Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
On 05/19/2012 05:00 PM, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:57:03AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> 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.
> Would you mind packaging ancina and posting it to another hosting
> location? IIRC Mark Hymers was interested and he already hosts a bunch
> of armhf buildd's.
ancina is a developer's board, so what components should be in the
shipping if we go that route?
How long would it take to have better machines than ancina so it could
just get fased out btw?
On another note, the only reason ancina cannot get OOB access is because
it's not rack mountable. We can easily provide OOB access for rack
mountable things and probably could even provide more rackspace for
Debian things (have to get that confimed though if it's something worth