Re: [buildd] Etch?
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> Hi all,
> I don't know what everyone else thinks about it here, but it would
> appear to me that making it in time for Etch is not going to happen
> anymore now.
> * Too many compiler bugs
> * As a result, too many uncompiled packages since *ages*. We haven't
> been over the 95% mark of the buildd.debian.org "graph" (as opposed to
> "graph2") since almost a year, if I'm not mistaken, which is just
> terribly bad.
> * Even if we *would* be able to fix our toolchain in time (I would find
> that highly unlikely, but still), then it would take us at least some
> weeks, if not months, to compile away our backlog. There are some
> large packages in failed and dep-wait currently.
> I'm a bit pessimistic about the future of our port currently. What are
> everyone else's thoughts on this?
> Should we just accept that we're not going to make it, or am I being too
> quick to forget about it here?
If the freeze comes before the toolchain can be fixed then m68k could
still do an inofficial stable release, like the one amd64 did. It was
always said that non release archs would be able to do that.
So I would say keep on fighting and hope for the best. If we make it
we make it. If not the work can go into an inofficial release. But the
less divergence is needed for that the better. Having 5-10 packages
patched compared to debian is fine but not 100+. So getting fixes
written and into etch is still top priority.
If the toolchain bugs are found and it comes down to CPU time then I
can still offer 2 68060, one with 128MB ram, the other with 48MB to
build packages. On the bigger one I could also give away accounts if
you need another developer system. The other one has only serial line
and sneakernet (burn cdrw, read cdrw).