Re: Donation of a Calxeda Highbank node
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:30:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:32:59AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > The impression I got during the brief from the arm porters is that it is
> > so far unclear how well Debian will run on this nice shiney thing.
> > So for now it's just a test box/early porting box, and the policies and
> > procedures that come with DSAing a machine would be more a hindrance
> > than an asset during that stage.
> That's fair, though I think the explicit goal should be to get it
> supported by Debian *so that* it can be used as a buildd.
I agree. Given that highbank is well supported mainline it and debian being
popular at server front, this platform should be a good fit for debian.
> Yes, understood; and I propose that "buildd" is the best use for it in the
> long term.
I think so too, using server hardware for buildd's as opposed to
developer boards for mobile usage sounds like a major win in the
robustness front.
My main concern is that having a single node as buildd without another
for development purposes means that we don't have easy means to keep
testing for example kernel upgrades.
Riku
Reply to: