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

Re: m68k buildd presents significant problem for non-us and testing

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Marco d'Itri wrote:

> On Feb 16, Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu> wrote:
>  >I believe this is unacceptably long.  Non-us maintainers want their
>  >packages tested too; users who are running testing also depend on
>  >these packages.
> I agree, it's not acceptable to delay moving packages to testing
> because some build daemons are slow or broken.
> I think a good compromise would be to promote a package to testing when 
> it has been compiled for at least n (to be determined) architectures.

Out of curiosity, if some autobuilders are so slow in comparison to others,
does it make sense to use cross-compilers for autobuilding?  There's ulterior
motive here on my part :), because I'm trying to get the gcc source package to
give me a cross-compiler and having no luck.  Still, it seems to me that
facilitating the setup of cross-compilers would help Debian in the long run,
since all the heavy compiling work could be done on heavy-duty machines,
regardless of architecture.  Having Debian machines of different architectures
is still important for testing, but there's no need to burden the rare
machines with work that could be done elsewhere.

Or am I wrong in thinking this is the reason for the delays on the m68k

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Reply to: