Re: [buildd] Etch?
Please don't forget that there are still those of us out there who use the
Debian m68k system every day. I have been putting in too much time at my
day job to participate much here, but my A2000/030/40MHz/16M/9Ghd/8mm DAT
is the 'visible computer' on my LAN. Always accessable on the other side of
my cable modem and router it serves as both my workstation, and my server
to access services on my home network. It provides the network boot service
for my Envizex X-Terminal (which I'm using to type this on - the 20 inch
display it came with is great). I use this system every day for email. It
also runs Apache, and X. I would offer it as a buildd, but with the
limit of 16M RAM from the GVP Combo Card, I think it would just spend
all its time swapping.
I have used it to learn Linux/Unix. I surf with Dillo, as it works well with this level of processor horsepower. The ability to telnet in to remotely check email (Mutt) is very useful to me (I hate web email clients).
Please also note that there are no Intel/AMD machines at this
location. The other machines here are various PPC/m68k Macs, a Sun
Ultra 1 and a IBM RS 6000 (the latter two not being used currently due
to too much time at the day job).
I have been lurking on this list and I just wanted to let you all know
that your efforts are very much appreciated here.
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 03:29:04PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> 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).
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org