Re: [buildd] Stuff
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:30:46PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My BoF about m68k here at DebConf went quite well; most of the release
> team was present, as was James Troup for at least part of it. One thing
> that came out of the discussion is that they really, really want 'faster
> buildd machines'; apparently someone in the security team (I don't
> recall who exactly) is really adamant about this too, because we appear
> to be delaying security updates from time to time. Having a faster
> machine to build security updates therefore would seem to be necessary.
> I'd suggest you go view the video, but unfortunately the power failed
> while we were working, so it's probably not there.
I strongly suggest that the box buildding security update use
distcc+crosscc. This will speed things quite a bit with no
risk of breakage since we are using a stable cross-compiler
that is well tested.
In my opinion, distcc+crosscc have more potential that aranym,
especially for security in term of speed gain and reliability.
I believe that if there had been a concerted attempt to use
distcc+crosscc on some buildd, we would have been able to get
released with Etch. Actually I still believe we can relase m68k
as part of etch 4.0r2 or 4.0r3 if we show a real involvement
even if merely symbolical.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: