Re: [buildd] Stuff
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 06:53:46PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> distcc+crosscc is my favorite as well. It's fast, it's cheap (in terms of
> CPU overhead) and it's fairly extensible (adding more distcc hosts).
> I think aranym is great for DDs and for installation tests, etc...
>
> > 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.
>
> Well, concerted attempt... what do we have and what do we need for some
> m68k+distcc+crosscc? What needs to be changed within the buildd chroot?
We essentially need a x86 box on the same LAN than the m68k. A
reasonnable x86 can serve several m68k without problems.
You need to install in the build chroot distcc and Roman Zippel
rosscc, set
$build_env_cmnd = "env DISTCC_HOSTS=<IP of cross compiling x86 box>";
in .sbuildrc and you are set.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: