On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:12:59PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 12:29:44PM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
>
> > > Currently I have a 2.8 Pentium4 with 2 GB RAM doing nothing. But it's not a
> > > machine that's not supposed to be online 24/7.
> > buildds aren't very useful if they're not up 24/7.
>
> True. And that's only part of my dilemma... my dedicated roto server is
> online 24/7 and has 2 GB RAM free for additional Xen VMs, but I ran out of
> IPs at the moment and aranym would be needed to run headless...
Can't use a nat ip? As for headless, I've been using xvnc4, which gets
me a remote head when I need it.
> > Internet access is required for:
> > 1) sid mirror - could work around with a local mirror, but that's a lot
> > of disk space
> > 2) incoming - could skip building out of incoming, but causes dependency
> > headaches and give-backs if you're building off the top of the queue
>
> I think I already used once a incoming mirror script that worked quite
> well...
You mirror incoming? Yikes, that updates all the time. I mirror sid
binary and use approx for everything else.
> > 3) w-b access - could manually queue packages, but it's a pain to
> > maintain
>
> Oh well, yes... how about having our own w-b again?
I'm routing around that until we get a more permanent solution.
> > 4) mail - easily batched
>
> Mail is sometimes harder than it appears to be... (-;
uucp is my friend.
> I could start aranym on that Pentium4 machine for some weeks (until mid/end
> of May) if that helps. Then the machine will be relocated...
I would think a month would certainly help. Hopefully we'll have some
other takers too.
> > > Maybe we can get a natively built and uptodate core Debian for m68k and a
> > > best-effort {stable}-m68k suite for other software (built by aranym
> > > buildds)? And yes, it's difficult to tell which package should end up in
> > > core or in {stable}-m68k...
> > Plus we move further away from stock debian. Not that I'm arguing, I
> > think we'll have to find a way to do it sooner or later. Perhaps we'll
> > point the direction for future debian changes. We've been talking about
> > it for years, meanwhile brute force would probably help. :)
>
> Well, my thinking was, that m68k would be re-included more likely into
> testing migration/release when it just requires some core packages. Of
> course the TLS problem has to be resolved until then. At least the m68k core
> would then be in sync again with the rest of Debian.
>
> So, the way to go is for now:
> 1) get some more CPU power on building packages
> 2) resolve the TLS issue (and other showstoppers)
> 3) choose some packages for a m68k core distribition and built all others on
> aranym buildds
> ?
*magic occurs*
we release. ;)
Peace,
Stephen
--
Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!
<stephen@marenka.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature