Re: Request for kFreeBSD (and Hurd) porters
Hi Steven,
Glad to see you back on the mailing list!
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Svante Signell
<svante.signell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 09:17 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Svante Signell wrote:
>> > The Debian GNU/kFreeBSD port recently obtained a buildd building
>> > packages for the sid distribution, kamp. Thank you very much for
>> > your effort making this happening jrtc27 :)
>>
>> Thanks very much for this James! It was a really nice surprise to
>> see packages building again.
>
> :)
>
>> May I ask who has provided the hardware/hosting? And what is the DNS
>> hostname of the machine? (kamp.buildd.org does not resolve for me).
>
> That's me :D
The machine is NATed so has no public address nor a real hostname. The use of
`kamp.buildd.org` is merely for mail purposes (there are only MX records that
point to my mail server, from which kamp retrieves messages by fetchmail).
>> Also, how are the i386 builds done: is that a kfreebsd-i386 chroot
>> on a kfreebsd-amd64 system? Or is it a separate VM running
>> "natively" on the 32-bit kernel?
>
> It's a kfreebsd-i386 chroot running on a kfreebsd-amd64 system.
As Svante said; the downside is k-a has priority over k-i (though sid k-i still
comes before exp k-a).
>> By the way, since 4 days or so many packages are Built but not
>> Installed in the archive. Is that because a DD must manually check
>> and sign them?
>
> Yes, this is a drawback. James does all signing manually whenever he
> has time. I'm not a DD so I'm not authorized to do such things.
I try to do it at least every other day. The recent holdup has been waiting for
the util-linux/shadow transition (takeover of su(1)), as the two must be
upgraded in lockstep, so if one is built and uploaded but not the other,
wanna-build will regard every package as uninstallable, blocking builds until
the other is also built and uploaded. They've been built on both k-a and k-i
now though so I will be resuming signing when I get home this evening.
James
Reply to: