Re: [buildd] Etch?
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Getting Debian/68k to run on ColdFire _will_ solve many problems. It
> will not magically fix the toolchain, that much is clear; however, it
> will get us hardware that is much beefier than what we have now, and
> this is much needed:
>
> * We had a buildd park of 12 machines, last I checked; if more than a
> few of those go down, we start lagging behind again. Due to the age of
> much of our machines, this happens more often than is the case for,
> say, amd64. Getting newer and more powerful hardware will mean that we
> will not have broken hardware as often, and that we may have more
> surplus capacity than we do now. While we can just add new buildd
> machines now, too, this isn't the most ideal solution, since adding a
> new buildd host increases the load on buildd maintainers fairly
> importantly; the cost/benefit ratio is much better on ColdFire.
> * If major updates are in order for large sets of packages, wanna-build
> will queue them in semi-random order, which isn't the most efficient.
> Since the core libraries take some time to build, the mess remains for
> a while. It takes quite a bit of work to fix such a mess; if those
> core libraries are built faster, then the mess is smaller and the
> number of failed packages and packages in dep-wait will be much,
> _much_ smaller.
What's the status of etch on aranym?
-f
Reply to: