Re: Proposal to replace/extend current armhf builders
+++ Konstantinos Margaritis [2013-11-13 23:05 +0200]:
> Hi all,
>
> Here is some food for thought for the minidebconf that starts tomorrow
> in Cambridge [1]. Unfortunately I will not make it there, though I wish
> I did, but I'm in the process of job searching at the moment[2] and
> could not afford the expense.
We miss you markos.
> Upgrade 5
> of the iMX53s with 5 Odroid-XU and be done with armhf builders for a
> long time.
>
> This is a counter-proposal to what Hector Oron (zumbi) suggested: that
> we buy or get donations for real server class hardware (arm64).
Or arm32, for just the two 32-bit ports.
This was discussed somewhat today, and we all agree that server-grade
hardware would be best. James from Boston told us that half a chassis
full would be about $8000 (or was that £8000?) Either way we can't afford it.
Arm64 kit will be even more expensive/unobtanium for a while. Although I
expect the situation to be very different laster next year.
> 1. Terribly expensive: a single board costs ~7k USD. And it needs the
> chassis which is also expensive. So if you take redundancy in mind, you
> need 2 setups in 2 locations, so at least 14k just for the boards and
> I'd not be surprised if the chassis costs more than 5k itself. So in
> total ~25k.
It's expensive, but not that bad. Or are you talking about 64-bit
hardware? Has anyoneannounced prices for that yet?
> 3. Liability. Right now armhf builders (iMX53 Loco boards) are in ARM HQ
> and York University, if I'm not mistaken. If something happens and that
> equipment breaks due to eg. some fault in the electrical wiring and a
> board burns, the boards are very cheap to replace and there is no
> issue there. However with $10k+ worth of equipment I'm very doubtful if
> ARM or York or anyone really would accept to host these systems and
> accept liability in case of fault.
I think that's nonsense. If we had a box we could find somewhere to house it.
> So, my counter-proposal to that is that we get instead some cheap easy
> to replace boards like the Arndale [4] or the Odroid-XU [5]. Personally
> I'd prefer the XU as it's better equipped, but I'd go with either
> choice if people think it's better.
> Finally, last but not least, there is the issue of mainline kernel
> support for exynos5 and the odroid/arndale boards.
There was very strong resistance in the room to the use of buildds
without debian kernel support, because it's a major hassle and security
risk. That rules out odroid for the time being.
> If people *really* don't want non-mainline kernels, then we could go
> for the utilite boards, I would suggest the Pro version:
>
> http://utilite-computer.com/web/utilite-pro-specifications
Or Wanda or the Nitrogen6x we've just kindly been offered.
What's the mainline status of those?
> Anyway, apologies for my long email,
No need to apologise - it's a very useful summary and useful basis for discussion.
I think we need to bash out some criteria for deciding during the
mini-debconf. i.e deciding how we decide (or just make a decision if possible).
e.g hold out for server-grade kit for a while - if so how long? (0 months, 3 months, 6months, longer?)
Is debian kernel an absolute requirement, or are we prepared to risk a
custom kernel if we think it'll only be for 6 months?
Rate the other options. (Sponsored kit immediately has a significant advantage :-)
Markos- as driver on this, could you summarise the relevant features of odroid, N6x, wanda, utilite?)
Speed, specs, cost, remote serial, remote power cycle, mounting, kernel
status, availability, power consumption. Anything else important.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/
Reply to: