[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Arm bof and raspbian.

Resending to list

Wookey wrote:
Afterwards another suggestion was made: to simply do an armv6,vfp2
rebuild of armhf in ports.debian.net.
Never heard of ports.debian.net before. Is it in any way related to
 Combined with an installer
configured to point to that repo it would mean 'normal' armhf stayed
exactly as-is, but we'd also have a v6 armhf on ports which was easy
to install. Users just have to point their repos at the right one.
Not sure how it's any easier than raspbian is now. The issue with the
installer is that noone has stepped up to do a proper port, we just have
an unmaintainable hack someone did based on taking an installer image
from debian and replacing bits.
This actually seems like quite a good idea, as it's easy to do and
should give everyone what they need. It can easily be dropped in the
future when it's no longer relevant. We do have an issue of
ports.debian.net machine currently being overloaded, but we need to
fix that for arm64 anyway.

I'll reserve judgement until someone has explained exactly what
ports.debian.org is and what advantage it would give over using the
infrastructure we have built out for raspbian, whether it could handle
the load (archive.raspbian.org and mirrordirector.raspbian.org have
nontrivial load), what flexibility we might gain/lose and so-on. It
doesn't seem to even have any concept of testing or stable.

One possibility if there is someone sufficiently interested* in unstable
for the Pi would be to use ports.debian.net for that and keep
raspbian.org for testing and stable (for various reasons having a
derivative of unstable and a derivative of testing in the same repo
opens up a lot of nasty corner cases).

* And by sufficiently interested I mean prepared to pay for and run a
build cluster.

Reply to: