Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
On Thu, 17 May 2012, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 06:00:18AM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote:
> >On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 00:59 +0100, peter green wrote:
> >> The statement that all but one armel buildd is at the same location disagrees with
> >> the debian machines database.
> >[...]
> >> Metropolitan Area Network Darmstadt : arcadelt
> >> DG-i: argento
> >
> >They may still be physically located there, but:
> >
> >wanna-build=> select username, max(last_seen) as last_seen from
> >armel.users group by username having username like '%arcadelt' or
> >username like '%argento' order by 2;
> > username | last_seen
> >-----------------------+----------------------------
> > buildd_armel-arcadelt | 2011-04-17 21:14:11.291825
> > buildd_armel-argento | 2011-10-23 00:12:31.850723
> >(2 rows)
> >
> >iirc they're only still hosted in case e.g. the ARM hosting falls over
> >for a prolonged period, but I'm happy to be corrected on that.
>
> AFAIK it's something like that, yes. Again, we're expecting to add
> more v7 machines to the cluster in York soon-ish to help with this.
We (DSA) have been told by the buildd people to kill argento and
arcadelt. We just haven't gotten around to doing it yet. So
effectively armel does not have buildd location redundancy.
cf. RT#3490, RT#3694, RT#3699.
Cheers,
--
| .''`. ** Debian **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: