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

How should stalin be handled on slower architectures?

Summary: An RC bug has been filed claiming that stalin's source is
  "too big" and that it shouldn't be built for m68k (and I'd presume
  arm), though it has been built on both in the past.  So I'd like to
  figure out what action, if any, would be appropriate.

A bit back, a new version of stalin was uploaded which was intended
for testing.  It has built for i386 and sparc, but hasn't built yet
for m68k or arm (though we have packages of the previous version for
both of those architectures).  The arm build was attempted, but
failed, most likely because it wasn't given enough time; I asked about
extending the build time on arm, but never heard back.

Just recently Matthais filed an RC bug claiming that "the source is
too large" (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=271836).

For those that don't know, stalin is very demanding on the build host.
It consists of one 22MB C file, so it does take a *very* long time to
build on older architectures.  Accordingly, I try to be careful to not
upload new versions very frequently.

While I'm not very inclined to agree that the size of the source is a
release critical bug, especially since we've already been providing
packages for those architectures.  I am willing to consider dropping
support for slower architectures if that's the "right thing to do".

Thoughts?  Any relevant policy I might have overlooked?

Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4

Reply to: