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

Re: hppa in danger of being ignored for testing migration and eventual removal

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:34 PM, dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 05:09:25PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Luk Claes <luk@debian.org> wrote:

>> > * The machines that host the buildds still seem to have a very
>> > unreliable kernel. Is there any update on this?
>> I can't comment on this.
> Thibaut had planned to setup a second buildd (and I think had it up
> for a while?) but that box experienced a hardware failure. We're also
> working on moving one of the buildds to a different platform
> (rp2470). We have no specific reason to believe that will be any
> better, but its worth a shot.

Yes the supplementary buildd had a major hardware failure today
(SBA/LBA failures during last POST and now the GSP can't load PDC
anymore. The machine is basically dead). I'm switching the hard drives
to another box I have that I used elsewhere (not yet back online as
the Debian kernel seems to have major trouble coping with PCI addon
NICs - tulip and tg3 HPMC the machine on driver load), and I'm still
hoping to get feedback on some hardware donation requests I've made a
month or so ago.

I hereby take the opportunity to say that I would gladly welcome any
rackable parisc system in my server room. :-)

>> I run stock: linux-image-2.6.26-1-parisc64-smp (2.6.26-13)
>> on my SMP 2x PA8700 system without any problems.
> There are several reports of stability on various mixtures of
> kernel/platform - and the non-buildd debian.org hppa machine seems to
> be quite stable as well. But, once we start running a buildd on
> something, instability issues abound.

The only issue I've been aware of so far was the ruby build problem.
If there are others, they need more publicity I think. OTOH, ISTR
Carlos said most of the problems could go away with the transition to
NPTL. Might be worth a try...

>> > * The debian-installer dailies that are now built again, but seem to
>> > fail to build most of the time. Is there any particular reason for this?
>> No idea. Do you have a log?

I would blame recent failures on failure to build kernel, maybe?
AFAICT there was the phonet issue (fixed since then) and it seems
recent kernel builds fail to link the btrfs module...


Thibaut VARENE

Reply to: