Re: Please give back prometheus on armel
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 11:03:22AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>On 24/11/16 05:37, Martín Ferrari wrote:
>> On 23/11/16 19:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>
>>>> prometheus 1.2.3+ds2-2 failed to build on armel, but I am not being able
>>>> to reproduce this failure in porter boxes. Can you please trigger a
>>>> rebuild to see if it was a transient problem?
>>
>>> Given back.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Now I have a problem, that maybe somebody can help with... The build
>> failed again on armel[0], but I still can't reproduce this.
>>
>> I have just tried on abel. I created a sid chroot, and rebuild from the
>> source present in the archive. I checked all the build-dependencies, and
>> version numbers match exactly.
>>
>> But in abel the tests run just fine. Is there any significant difference
>> with the armel buildds? I have the same failure both in henze and antheli.
>
>Hardware wise, they look similar:
>
>https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=abel
>https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=henze
>https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=antheil
>
>henze is an armhf buildd that also builds armel, but antheil is an armel buildd,
>like abel, so that seems fine.
Correct - they're exactly the same hardware, using the same kernel
etc. The only difference is that some of these are using an armhf
rootfs and some an armel rootfs (which is just an accident of
history). A buildd running inside a chroot should be just the same on
all these machines...
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"Yes, of course duct tape works in a near-vacuum. Duct tape works
anywhere. Duct tape is magic and should be worshipped."
-― Andy Weir, "The Martian"
Reply to: