[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

buildd macs, was Re: [buildd] Etch?




On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:28:56PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > 
> > > * More importantly, currently half of our buildd park are 
> > >   macintoshes that will not work with 2.6 kernels. 2.2 and 2.4 are 
> > >   scheduled to be removed from unstable, a move which will likely 
> > >   occur this month, maybe even this week.
> > 
> > Does anyone have the hostnames and specs for those machines? In 
> > particular, the model names, and the types of network cards in use (if 
> > not built-in). I seem to recall that some are Q900/Q950 and some are 
> > Q840av models, are there others?
> 
> There's a full list on www.buildd.net. Though it appears I was mistaken; 
> it used to be the case that half of them were macs, but this time is 
> past, there are "only" five: 2 840AV, 2 Quadra 950, one Quadra 650. For 
> experimental, I have one more Quadra 950 and a Centris 650.

Well, it's not pretty, but I can give you advance warning of the issues 
on those machines.

650:   No real time clock or serial drivers. Broken MacII ADB driver.
840av: No real time clock or serial drivers.
9x0:   Hard to say (I don't have any). Certainly no RTC.

The workaround for the RTC is ntpd and tune2fs.

The workaround for ADB on the 650 is to disable the MacII ADB driver in 
the kernel config (which won't hurt the 840av), and to boot linux 2.2 if 
you need the console (e.g. to setup remote login). Disabling the IOP ADB 
driver may fix the 950. Out of all of the ADB drivers, only CUDA is known 
to work. The others are fatal (by all reports, and my own tests) and 
should really be disabled.

The 650's onboard ethernet needs the SONIC driver enabled in the kernel 
config. Avoid ethernet cards unless SONIC (DP83932) based. Last I checked 
SONIC was not enabled in the debian config due to build problems, but it 
can be enabled now.

-f


> I guess the change here is because the most recent additions were not 
> macs.
> 
> 



Reply to: