Re: .d.o machines which are down (Re: Questions for the DPL candidates)
Vore isn't down.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:54:18AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Ben Collins (email@example.com) [050317 03:25]:
> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 04:31:19PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > Ben Collins <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 08:44:49PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> > > > > In article <[🔎] 20050315121332.GI1437@internal> you write:
> > > > > >I have an e3500 to replace both auric and vore (and the raid), but I
> > > > > >haven't gotten an ok from James to do so yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > That would cut the number of sparc buildds down to one, when two are
> > > > > required for RC archtectures under the new proposal.
> > > >
> > > > That's ok because two buildd's can run on the one machine. It has 6 cpu's.
> > >
> > > That cannot be the requirement. The point has to be an additional and
> > > independently functioning piece of hardware. If the disk blows or it
> > > is compromised or something, the others should be able to continue.
> > The requirement sucks, lets leave it at that. If the machine dies, I can
> > have two to replace it within a day or two.
> Ah, so why is vore down now for some time now? If it's so easy to
> replace a broken machine, why don't you just do it? (And, BTW, you might
> be on vacation, sick, ... - we need more than just one machine.)
> PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/