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

Re: Emulated buildds (for SCC architectures)?

Hi Gunnar,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:06:47PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:

> And I am sure we can find more examples like these - I have not really
> checked, but I would be surprised if architectures as popular as
> Sparc, Alpha or ARM wouldn't have an emulator (although probably not
> currently as reliable as those two).

> Now, if we face dropping one or more of our architectures (i.e. m68k)
> because new hardware can not be found anymore (the Vancouver proposal
> mentions that "the release architecture must be publicly available to
> buy new" in order to keep it as a fully supported architecture - I
> know, SCC != fully supported, but anyway, a buildd can die and create
> huge problems to a port), why shouldn't we start accepting buildds
> running under emulated machines?

I quite agree with Anthony that if we have to emulate the machine, there's
not much sense in supporting it.

I do know, from first-hand experience trying to get ssh running on a Cobalt,
that compilation speed is not always correlated with the usefulness of a
system; so I'm not completely opposed to using distcc (in moderation!) for
release architectures, but I would still first like to see some serious
discussion about why it's useful to build all the software we do for all the
architectures before agreeing that such a distcc network is warranted.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: