Dear all, Recently I have been adding support for armhf and i386 on the ci.debian.net infrastructure. To avoid confusing, let me summarize the current state of affairs. # Archs ci.debian.net now supports the following architectures: amd64, arm64, armhf, i386 and ppc64el. amd64 is the oldest architecture and is used for all use-cases I'll describe below. arm64 is the second fully supported architecture and used for all use-cases. ppc64el is supported for quite a while now, but it only has two debci workers. So it's not really suitable for migration testing as I fear it won't be able to keep up (I'll check in the coming days). It's used for proposed-updates. armhf runs on a arm64 host and I added it today to the britney configuration for migration. It was already covering the other use-cases for some days. i386 is really fresh. I'm bootstrapping the testing archive right now (generating migration-reference/0 for all packages with tests and one excuses-only run of britney). # Use-cases (all handled via britney instances) We are using the ci.debian.net infrastructure for the following cases: unstable-to-testing migration influenced by autopkgtest results for amd64, arm64 and armhf. experimental-to-unstable pseudo excuses for amd64, arm64 and armhf proposed-update checking for amd64, arm64, armhf and ppc64el. Please let me know if you have questions or comments. Paul PS: I'm expecting mips64el workers in the relative near future. That would only leave armel and s390x as a release architecture that's fully uncovered (as we can probably also run mipsel on those mips64el workers)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature