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

Re: the state of daily-builds

* Frans Pop (elendil@planet.nl) [100331 21:38]:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > The "svn update" inside the chroot fails now - nothing to worry, but
> > would be nice if that wouldn't happen.
> Looks like you currently call 'daily-build build' which also does an 
> update. How about adding a 'build-only' option that skips the update?

Sounds good to me. If the build-only could also be more verbose (i.e.
logging during build) I'd appreciate that even more.

> > If there are any more questions, or things to change, please don't
> > hesitate to contact me.
> Which arches have been set up according to this system and which (existing 
> ones) are still to be done?

mips, mipsel and ia64 are setup this way (but the mipsel buildd is
down since 2 days for hardware issues).

As of now, hppa and armel (besides kfreebsd*) can't be done this way,
because they have no lvm chroots yet. hppa should be available soon,
armel probably only after new hardware exists.

> There have been no amd64 builds the last few days. Any idea why?

Yes. They used keys w/o a forced command.

> Can you give an estimate when daily builds for hppa, mips and powerpc could 
> be available again?

mips is as of now (I enabled that yesterday before sending out the
mail, but the status page is updated only very seldom). hppa waits on
DSA right now. powerpc sometimes this week. (I sent the mail after I
reached a state where I thought "now this really works, and just needs
to be rolled out to the buildds" - what stays open is just going
through the list of arches not building now, and adding them if

> And a last question for both you and the D-I team.
> Should we now set up all arches this way, or do people want to keep their 
> existing builds? I would be happy to have the s390 builds (which I 
> currently run) done on a buildd.

I don't mind. It doesn't take too much effort to set it up, once all
the preconditions are in place. And it's just "yet another thing


Reply to: