On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 07:08:14AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > For sparc, a second buildd was brought on-line on auric this year because > > (IIRC) vore was not keeping up with the upload volume at the time; this > > required effort on DSA's part to clear enough disk space to be able to run a > > buildd, until which time sparc was holding some RC bugfixes out of testing. > > If sparc had had a buildd in reserve, this would not have affected the flow > > of development for sarge. Auric is now off-line, as noted. > My point exactly, though. It was a problem with CPU, not a problem with > machine availability. Your alpha example is a case of hardware > availability. I recall that same event, and no one had a spare alpha, or > didn't have a place to host it. Alpha's a dead platform. > If this e3500 dies, I can get another machine within days to replace it. > I'll keep this Ultra2 (2x400mhz, 1gig ram) on standby in the event that > something happens to it, so it can be used in the interim until I get a > suitable replacement. > How's that? I don't know why you're asking me; I've already said that I would consider this configuration acceptable for a release architecture, but that I wouldn't recommend it to the Sparc porters. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature