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

Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status

Hash: SHA256

On 28/11/13 21:04, Niels Thykier wrote:


> Architecture Status ===================
> ia64 causes us concern for the following reasons:
> * binutils issues (#718047, #720404), resulting in build failures
> blocking transitions
> * many packages link to libunwind on ia64, which causes issues if 
> used at boot time (as the library is in /usr) and means nearly
> 3000 packages need to be rebuilt when the SONAME changes. The
> ingrained nature also leads to libunwind8 currently depending on
> libunwind7 (which is no longer built)
> * d-i in a virtualised environment on top of HP-UX is broken (see
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2013/11/msg00017.html)
> We have stopped considering ia64 as a blocker for testing 
> migration. This means that the out-of-date and uninstallability 
> criteria on ia64 will not hold up transitions from unstable to
> testing for packages. It is expected that unless drastic
> improvement occurs, ia64 will be removed from testing on Friday
> 24th January 2014.
> The architectures sparc, mips and mipsel also cause concern:
> * [sparc] cannot run stable kernels.  Kernels in sid have issues
> too with some machines. * [sparc] gcc randomly crashes, SMP not
> working * [sparc] only one porter * [mips, mipsel]
> buildds/porterboxes run on hardware which is very old or has known
> defects: - mips octeon is unstable - mipsel loongson have CPU bugs 
> - swarm is a decade old
> kFreeBSD was a technology preview, and has not generated enough
> user interest to bring in sufficient install base to continue in
> this state.
> We will review this situation after 28th January 2014. 
> Architectures still causing us concern at that point will join ia64
> in no longer being considered for britney migrations and may be
> dropped from testing after a further period.
> s390 and Hurd will not be release architectures for Jessie. s390
> was replaced by s390x in Wheezy and this completes that transition.
> As for Hurd; we do not believe it is ready.  Particularly, we
> believe that it does not surpass kFreeBSD in user interest or
> install base.
> Note that s390x and powerpc could also do with more porters, but
> at this time we are not giving an official warning for them.

I've found the builds on the less used architectures have been useful
for flushing out unusual bugs, particularly when the code ships with
many test cases and it exposes problems for big endian machines, etc.

Also, kFreeBSD and HURD are both kind of special in that they are not
Linux, it would be good to keep one or the other around even if other
architectures are culled more aggressively.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/


Reply to: