Re: DSA concerns for jessie architectures
Martin Zobel-Helas <email@example.com> writes:
> [please consider replacing debian-ports@ldo with the appropriate port
> specific list when replying.]
> At our recent Essen sprint, DSA went through the release qualification
> matrix (for wheezy, as there isn't one for jessie, yet) and defined a
> set of requirements that we consider necessary for us to support a port
> for the next stable release.
> We have limited these requirements to whether DSA can support a port
> well or not, and we wanted to establish these requirements early in the
> release cycle so that our concerns can be addressed.
> Our requirements for machines are not new; they are:
> * reliability - The stable release manager requires that we operate
> three machines for each port: two buildd machines in different
> locations and one porter machine. These machines must be reliable
> (see mips for counterexample).
> * out of band management - We require the ability to manage the machines
> independently of their primary network interface: serial console or
> better, remotely-controllable power.
> * supportability - We require that the machines be commercialy available
> (within financial constraints) and that they be supportable through a
> warranty or post-warranty support or are otherwise easy to replace.
> * stability - We require that the machine's architecture have an
> actively-maintained stable kernel in the archive.
> * environment - We require that packages critical for DSA operations be
> available: puppet, samhain, syslog-ng, ferm/pf, etc.
> Historically, we have not been enforcing these requirements strictly
> and this has caused / continues to cause us significant operational
> challenges resulting in our inability to render the service levels that
> should reasonably be expected of us. Therefore, we believe it is
> important that all debian.org machines meet these requirements.
> Based on the list of requirements enumerated above, we currentlty are
> concerned about the following architectures from the perspective of
> using them as debian.org machines:
> * armel: no remote management (being worked on); no archive kernel for
> the machines we use.
afair buildd are:
marvell DB-78x00 -> should be supported by armel kernel flavour mx78xx0
thecus n2100 -> should be supported by armel kernel flavour iop32x
Please, can you explain what's exactily missing on kernel support