Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
- To: debian-release@lists.debian.org, debian-arm@lists.debian.org
- Cc: Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>, Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>, Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com>, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
- Subject: Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
- From: Andreas Barth <aba@ayous.org>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 11:28:28 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20120519092828.GD2385@mails.so.argh.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Andreas Barth <aba@ayous.org>, debian-release@lists.debian.org, debian-arm@lists.debian.org, Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>, Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>, Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com>, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20120519090130.GT1610@anguilla.noreply.org>
- References: <[🔎] E1SUdCk-00057f-0K@kaa.jungle.funky-badger.org> <[🔎] 4FB43F50.1040507@p10link.net> <[🔎] 1337230818.28758.2.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org> <[🔎] 20120517121833.GA9173@einval.com> <[🔎] 20120519082812.GP1610@anguilla.noreply.org> <[🔎] 4FB7605F.7040703@debian.org> <[🔎] 20120519090130.GT1610@anguilla.noreply.org>
* Peter Palfrader (weasel@debian.org) [120519 11:18]:
> On Sat, 19 May 2012, Luk Claes wrote:
>
> > As everyone keeps claiming there is no armel buildd location redundancy,
> > I don't have much motivation to keep ancina running. It's ignored anyway.
>
> It's been down for a week or longer now. I sent you email, you didn't
> answer.
>
> We have no out of band management, no serial console, no remote power.
>
> And even if it worked, it alone would not be able to keep up.
Looking at stats now, it seems that armel doesn't behave better than
mipsel currently. If however both arches have a buildd down, that
would fit.
Andi
Reply to: